David E. Wheeler wrote:
On Jan 23, 2008, at 10:23, David E. Wheeler wrote:
Makes sense for a mod_perl developer, of course, but personally I'm
usually building mod_perl to run Bricolage instances, so the static
compile has always made sense. The fact that the DSO builds are more
stable now
Under Perl 5.10, Apache::FakeRequest offers up this helpful warning:
trigger% perl -lwe 'use Apache::FakeRequest'
Name "Apache::FakeRequest" used only once: possible typo at /usr/local/
lib/perl5/site_perl/5.10.0/darwin-2level/Apache/FakeRequest.pm line 51.
It seems that import() is getting ca
Original Message
Subject: [rt.cpan.org #32486] ModPerl::MM: no include path for apr.h
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 14:08:48 -0500
From: Malcolm J Harwood via RT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mon Jan 21 1
On Jan 23, 2008, at 10:23, David E. Wheeler wrote:
Makes sense for a mod_perl developer, of course, but personally I'm
usually building mod_perl to run Bricolage instances, so the static
compile has always made sense. The fact that the DSO builds are more
stable nowadays is great, of course
On Jan 23, 2008, at 00:12, Philippe M. Chiasson wrote:
Ah, I always thought that mp1 was better off statically compiled
into Apache.
I used to do it that way too for the longest time.
I've been doing it that way for years.
I've switched to DSO a while back, mainly because it is just so m
David E. Wheeler wrote:
On Jan 22, 2008, at 15:21, Philippe M. Chiasson wrote:
David E. Wheeler wrote:
On Jan 21, 2008, at 22:48, Philippe M. Chiasson wrote:
Oh, another thing to make sure is that the httpd tree you are
building
in is free of bits from a previous build attempt. Caught me o
