[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for your prompt response!
We did compile Apache with CFLAGS=-D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE
-D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 but we're trying to move away from this now,
because of vendors like IBM and Oracle not willing to re-compile (websphere
mods and mod_ossos) with the same flags.
with 'inside information' into mod_perl to comment on this
one...
Thx again,
Jaco Greyling
-Original Message-
From: Ged Haywood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 18 June 2003 14:53
To: Greyling, Jaco
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: non-LFS Apache 1.3.27 w/ LFS Perl 5.8.0 (using mod_perl)
Hi
Hi there,
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My question now is, did Doug take this into consideration when he
build mod_perl v1.27 (w/ PERL_USELARGEFILES=0)
I'm sure Doug took into consideration all sorts of things we never
even thought about. Try it out and let us know what
PROTECTED]
Sent: 19 June 2003 14:45
To: Greyling, Jaco
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: non-LFS Apache 1.3.27 w/ LFS Perl 5.8.0 (using mod_perl)
Hi there,
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My question now is, did Doug take this into consideration when he
build mod_perl v1.27 (w
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 18 June 2003 03:36
To: Greyling, Jaco
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: non-LFS Apache 1.3.27 w/ LFS Perl 5.8.0 (using mod_perl)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Guys,
anyone with experience on the below problem???
why reposting the same question 3 times? Please give
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey
Sorry - it took 30 mins to receive the confirmation (wasn't sure if it went
through successfully the 1st time)...
Anyway, I don't have a BUG to report - all I want to know is, is it SAVE to
run non-LFS Apache with LFS Perl using mod_perl LFS. It
you re-compile
Apache with CFLAGS=-D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64?
Thanks again,
Jaco Greyling
-Original Message-
From: Stas Bekman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 18 June 2003 10:59
To: Greyling, Jaco
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: non-LFS Apache 1.3.27 w/ LFS Perl
Hi there,
On Wed, 18 Jun 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thus without re-compiling my whole Perl 5.8.0 build I need to come
up with a solution.
I really don't see why you don't recompile your Perl. It's not a big
deal and it's going to be a lot safer that way.
Sorry for my ignorance but it
?
If not then I'll mail Doug and tell him to add a conditional statement :)
Jaco Greyling
-Original Message-
From: Ged Haywood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 18 June 2003 13:06
To: Greyling, Jaco
Cc: mod_perl Mailing List
Subject: RE: non-LFS Apache 1.3.27 w/ LFS Perl 5.8.0 (using mod_perl)
Hi
:)
Jaco Greyling
-Original Message-
From: Ged Haywood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 18 June 2003 14:53
To: Greyling, Jaco
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: non-LFS Apache 1.3.27 w/ LFS Perl 5.8.0 (using mod_perl)
Hi Jaco,
On Wed, 18 Jun 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As you can see
All
Sorry if this question goes out to the wrong discussion group, but I've been
told if anyone could answer this then it'll be someone on this forum :) Ok,
here goes...
We use Perl 5.6.x and Perl 5.8.0 with LFS. We also use mod_perl 1.27 with
LFS and Apache 1.3.27 (with LFS).
To make a long
All
Sorry if this question goes out to the wrong discussion group, but I've been told if
anyone could answer this then it'll be someone on this forum :) Ok, here goes...
We use Perl 5.6.x and Perl 5.8.0 with LFS. We also use mod_perl 1.27 with LFS and
Apache 1.3.27 (with LFS).
To make a long
All
Sorry if this question goes out to the wrong discussion group, but I've been told if
anyone could answer this then it'll be someone on this forum :) Ok, here goes...
We use Perl 5.6.x and Perl 5.8.0 with LFS. We also use mod_perl 1.27 with LFS and
Apache 1.3.27 (with LFS).
To make a long
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Guys,
anyone with experience on the below problem???
why reposting the same question 3 times? Please give people some time to
respond to your questions, you can't expect an immediate reply.
Please advice, I would really appreciate the help.
[...]
Sorry if this
14 matches
Mail list logo
