Robert,
This kind of question is much better addressed to the TOMCAT-USER mailing list.
TOMCAT-DEV is for discussions about how to build Tomcat itself, not how to use
it. You can subscribe by sending an empty message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or follow the link on the Jakarta web
site.
Thanks,
Craig McClanahan
Robert Adams wrote:
> Hi I do not know if I am to junior for this list.
>
> I am running apache and tomcat.
> I got apache to pass requests for servlets and jsp files to tomcat, but only
> the default example JSP pages in the /examples directory under tomcat.
>
> The problem is that I cannot get tomcat to look at JSP files under my
> htdocs(apache) dir, it can only process stuff under the examples dir.
>
> How do I configure tomcat to process(compile) JSP pages to servlets located
> elsewhere from the default directories.
>
> A Newbie
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: GOMEZ Henri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 13:08
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: TC 4 / mod_jk
>
> Oups didn't view your reply in the list.
>
> >Tomcat 4.0 did not select mod_jk for several reasons. The
> >most important ones
> >are at the top:
> >
> >* MOD_JK (like MOD_JSERV before it) has no clue what a web
> > application is. This forces you to configure many items twice --
> > once in the web.xml file and once in the Apache configuration,
> > which is a pretty serious imposition on people trying to administer
> > the combination.
>
> Why not implemented such feature in mod_jk (extending ajp13 to ajp14 with
> news commands ?)
>
> >* While the 2.2 spec was silent in many areas, the 2.3 spec will
> > require an Apache+Tomcat combination to obey *all* the requirements
> > of the spec (same rules as for any other container). This means that
> > the things in web.xml *must* be respected. For example, a security
> > constraint in a web.xml file must be enforced, even on a
> > static resource that is served by Apache instead of Tomcat.
> > Substantial modifications
> > to MOD_JK would be needed to make this work (primarily in adding a
> > two-way exchange of configuration information).
>
> I'm sorry to say that this stuff may be added to mod_jk. Still the
> syndrom of the wheel.
>
> >* MOD_JK had no committers interested in maintaining it, at the time
> > that the decision was made. Subsequent to that time, several
> > volunteers have surfaced, including at least one person interested in
> > supporting MOD_JK under Tomcat 4.0. That would be fine with me,
> > as long as the result obeys all the rules.
>
> Sorry but mod_jk as at minima 3 commiters (Dan, Costin and I) ;)
> And many users as provided some patches.
>
> Let me resume :
>
> mod_jk :
>
> functionnal connector, load-balancing, TC 3.2 and 3.3 compatibility
>
> mod_webapp :
>
> connector (with bug in cookies -> no session possibles), no load-balancing,
> strictly restrited to 4.x
> I've reported the cookie problem at least 2 times but still no answer :
>
> http://w4.metronet.com/~wjm/tomcat/2000/Dec/msg01064.html
> http://w4.metronet.com/~wjm/tomcat/2001/Jan/msg00204.html
>
> The pragmatic approach will to add mod_webapp stuff (related to 2.3) to
> mod_jk, eventually
> by deriving ajp13 to ajp14. Adding two-ways exchange may be a real need for
> centralized
> admin (apache admin from tomcat or tomcat from apache)
>
> I didn't remember there was a vote or poll on mod_jk/mod_webapp ?-) (No
> polemic)
>
> A+
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
