On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Foo JH wrote:
Octavian Rasnita wrote:
Regarding the best Apache for Windows, I have a problem running Apache
under
windows and I think this thread might help me.
I tried Apache 2.2.4 with and without SSL support, and Apache 2.2.6 from
apachelounge, but they still don't work.
I'm using 2.2.4 now on Win32, and it's running good for me. Much much
better than the 2.x.x series from the Apache site. Works on XP and W2k3.
A point to note though is that you should not use the modperl
compilation from AL. Use the standard-issue one from theoryx5. Install
libapreq2 from theoryx5 also.
EXACTLY.
Because you used theoryx5's perl/modperl/libapreq2 built for VC8, along with
the AL build of 2.2.4 ALSO built for VC8, everything is dandy.
Equally if you used ActiveState perl (built VC6) + a VC6 build of modperl and
libapreq2 with the ASF distribution of httpd 2.2.4, everything is dandy.
Mix and match at your own risk.
Actually, I use VC6 to build all the ppm packages in our
theoryx5 repository, including mod_perl and libapreq2, so
as to be compatible with ActivePerl (also built with VC6).
But your point of mixing and matching at your own risk
is well-taken - the fact that the VC6 mod_perl package
appears to work with the AL build of Apache built with
VC8 may just mean that the testing done hasn't yet
encountered the problems that could in principle be
there; see, for example,
http://search.cpan.org/src/SHAY/Win32-SharedFileOpen-3.36/INSTALL
for an instance that is known to illustrate the problem.
I haven't looked into this, but the fact that AL's
mod_perl (compiled, presumably, with VC8) doesn't
work with, again presumably, ActivePerl (compiled
with VC6) may be another example of the dangers
of mixing components compiled with VC6 and VC8.
--
best regards,
Randy
