Geoffrey Young wrote:
So it seems to me that the simplest route to take is to
s/Apache::Test/Apache::Tester/ as suggested by David. Only one file is
modified.
If there are no objections, I'll proceed with this route.
not to be nitpicky, but Apache::Tester strikes me as, well, something.
this
Randy Kobes wrote:
On Thu, 8 May 2003, Stas Bekman wrote:
The problem with providing a replacement for Apache::test is
that some people are going to reinstall older mod_perl versions
and kill the overriden file.
That's certainly true in general (for case-preserving but
otherwise
Randy Kobes wrote:
On Thu, 8 May 2003, Stas Bekman wrote:
[ .. ]
One question remains: should the package be renamed to
Apache-Tester as well? Since people will see Apache::Test and
will try to install Apache::Test in CPAN.pm, and that won't
work.
Probably to make a clean break the whole package
Hi,
I have a question about the state of specweb99 module. The reason is that I
failed to compile the source I pulled out of CVS on RedHat 7.3 Linux:
apxs -c -DLINUX -I../../mm-1.1.3 -L../../mm-1.1.3 -lmm mod_specweb99.c
gcc -DLINUX=22 -DMOD_SSL=208105 -DUSE_HSREGEX -DEAPI -DEAPI_MM -fpic
So currently we are down to two options:
1) Integrate test.pm in Test.pm. I think we should bundle Apache::Test
with future versions of mod_perl to make the maintenance simple and
remove the original Apache::test from it.
if you mean future versions of mp1, that's a good idea. that's probably
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a question about the state of specweb99 module. The reason is
that I failed to compile the source I pulled out of CVS on RedHat 7.3
Linux:
apxs -c -DLINUX -I../../mm-1.1.3 -L../../mm-1.1.3 -lmm mod_specweb99.c
gcc -DLINUX=22 -DMOD_SSL=208105 -DUSE_HSREGEX
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm assuming you are using the Apache 1.3 version? Most of the folks
currently using mod_specweb99 are on Apache 2.0, so I don't know what
kind of shape the 1.3 version is in. Patches (created with diff -u)
would be appreciated.
Correct. I need it for HP's
