>Forgot to ask, would you be interested in instructions/simple shell
>script for building mod_jk as a statically linked Apache module?
>
Yes, certainly. Instruction and better shell script :)
But did mod_jk is really faster in statically mode rather
in DSO ?
>Bojan
>
>Dan Milstein wrote:
>>
>>
1 10:32 AM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: mod_webapp, mod_jk etc.
>
>
>Forgot to ask, would you be interested in instructions/simple shell
>script for building mod_jk as a statically linked Apache module?
>
>Bojan
>
>Dan Milstein wrote:
>>
>> I can&#x
Forgot to ask, would you be interested in instructions/simple shell
script for building mod_jk as a statically linked Apache module?
Bojan
Dan Milstein wrote:
>
> I can't speak to mod_webapp, but a mod_jk response:
>
> > - I understand the need for the TCP connections to be persistent in
> > m
Beauty.
I'm actually playing with 3.3 as well, because some of the features I
like (eg. realm per host) are there as well.
Bojan
Dan Milstein wrote:
>
> I can't speak to mod_webapp, but a mod_jk response:
>
> > - I understand the need for the TCP connections to be persistent in
> > mod_jk and
I can't speak to mod_webapp, but a mod_jk response:
> - I understand the need for the TCP connections to be persistent in
> mod_jk and mod_webapp, but I'm not sure why another connection wouldn't
> be attempted after the reuse of the previous connection fails;
This was just added to the 3.3 bra
I've posted a few messages about this to Tomcat User list, but since
this is really development related, I'm posting this one here.
Basically, mod_webapp packaged with Tomcat 4.0 b2 and b3 doesn't
compile, so I switched back to the version from b1. I've noticed a few
things:
- I'm confused as to
