ping Adam Cameron RE: Redhat 8 / Apache 2 modules

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by AD., Aug 28, 2003.

  1. AD.

    AD. Guest

    Adam,

    Did you make any progress with your Apache modules?

    After practicing some easy Apache builds and mod_jk2 builds on Gentoo and
    Debian, I went back to try again on Redhat 8.

    This is where I ran into similar issues to you.

    I installed a minimal RedHat 8, with NO Apache.

    I then downloaded the Apache 2.0.47 source, and the mod_jk2 source.

    Apache built and ran fine. mod_jk2 was a little harder to get built, but I
    got that built in the end. But Apache would reject mod_jk2 no matter how I
    built it complaining it wasn't compatible with that version of Apache.

    So I ran 'httpd -v' to check the Apache version, and lo and behold it was 2.0.40
    just like you had. What does Redhat do to cause this?

    I'm in the process of installing another fresh Redhat 8 without Apache to
    check what parts of Apache actually get installed by Redhat even if you
    don't ask for them.

    --insert generic anti redhat rant here--

    PS mod_jk2.so weighed in at 1.5MB on Redhat, but only 170kB on Gentoo
    (roughly the expected size).

    Cheers
    Anton
    AD., Aug 28, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. AD.

    Adam Cameron Guest

    >Did you make any progress with your Apache modules?

    Sorry mate, I didn't make any progress, no. I've had my priorities
    shifted around on this project, so getting it to work is on the
    backburner for a week or so.

    >So I ran 'httpd -v' to check the Apache version, and lo and behold it was 2.0.40
    >just like you had. What does Redhat do to cause this?


    Last time this happened to me, it was because one of the other
    packages (I'm not sure which) relies on some bits of Apache to be
    installed for them to run. So *now* I just install the bare minimum
    for what I need to get the box running: basically the OS, and the
    minimum developers tools, and that's it.

    I've just checked httpd -v on this box (didn't know you could do
    that!), and this box I've in front of now actually *does* claim to be
    2.0.47, which is a relief.

    If I find a solution, I'll be sure to post it.

    Adam
    Adam Cameron, Aug 28, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. AD.

    AD. Guest

    On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 14:09:00 +1200, Adam Cameron wrote:

    >>Did you make any progress with your Apache modules?

    >
    > Sorry mate, I didn't make any progress, no. I've had my priorities
    > shifted around on this project, so getting it to work is on the
    > backburner for a week or so.


    Oh well, I know how that feels :)


    >>So I ran 'httpd -v' to check the Apache version, and lo and behold it
    >>was 2.0.40 just like you had. What does Redhat do to cause this?

    >
    > Last time this happened to me, it was because one of the other packages
    > (I'm not sure which) relies on some bits of Apache to be installed for
    > them to run. So *now* I just install the bare minimum for what I need
    > to get the box running: basically the OS, and the minimum developers
    > tools, and that's it.


    I installed another Redhat the exact same way (NO web server stuff, just
    the dev basics) and I couldn't find any of the obvious Apache libs or
    utils anywhere.

    > I've just checked httpd -v on this box (didn't know you could do that!),
    > and this box I've in front of now actually *does* claim to be 2.0.47,
    > which is a relief.


    That's cool, I wonder why mine doesn't?

    Not only did it tell me that Apache was 2.0.40, it also said it was built
    last year?!?

    > If I find a solution, I'll be sure to post it.


    Likewise :)

    Cheers
    Anton
    AD., Aug 28, 2003
    #3
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Tru 2 Tha Game

    Cameron Diaz dumped Justin Timberlake

    Tru 2 Tha Game, Jul 23, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    373
    Jerry McG
    Jul 25, 2004
  2. Waterperson77

    Adam West and Richard Simmons

    Waterperson77, Feb 23, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    666
    Mark B.
    Feb 24, 2004
  3. Videos from Hell
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    404
    Videos from Hell
    Apr 20, 2004
  4. laura capozzola

    The Next James Cameron movie

    laura capozzola, Nov 29, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    392
    Mark Spatny
    Dec 3, 2004
  5. impossible

    Re: OT [Tua Cameron Fight]

    impossible, Oct 2, 2009, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    311
    impossible
    Oct 2, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page