Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
good chemistry is complicated,
and a little bit messy -LW
 
PerlMonks  

mod_perl for Apache 2.4 - when?

by MichaelGoltsman (Initiate)
on Dec 09, 2013 at 11:08 UTC ( #1066270=perlquestion: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??
MichaelGoltsman has asked for the wisdom of the Perl Monks concerning the following question:

Hi, Perl Monks, Does anybody know whether mod_perl 2.0.8 can be compiled with Apache 2.4? If not - is there an expectation to for mod_perl compatible with this version of Apache? Regards

Comment on mod_perl for Apache 2.4 - when?
Re: mod_perl for Apache 2.4 - when?
by ww (Bishop) on Dec 09, 2013 at 14:18 UTC
    Maybe TITS (Try It To See)?
Re: mod_perl for Apache 2.4 - when?
by taint (Chaplain) on Dec 09, 2013 at 15:58 UTC

    Somewhat along the same lines as ww. I might add, that given you'll likely be compiling it with your system' "package" management system. It's likely a safe bet. Given that you're system will automagically deal with any dependencies/version conflicts.

    In short; just do it. :)

    --Chris

    Yes. What say about me, is true.
    

      Any news on mod_perl apache 2.4 compatibility? Just tried to build mod_perl on FreeBSD system with all usr apps built from source, no luck for me!

Re: mod_perl for Apache 2.4 - when? (ask the devs)
by Anonymous Monk on Dec 10, 2013 at 01:44 UTC
      See also : http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/engine?list=modperl&do=search_results&search_forum=forum_8&search_string=2.4&search_type=AND


      libremen.com : legal cases, contracts and insurance claims management software
Re: mod_perl for Apache 2.4 - when?
by trippledubs (Scribe) on Dec 11, 2013 at 05:26 UTC
    Hi,

    I tried several months ago and it did not work out. I'm not exactly sure what benefits 2.4 has, but at least in my case, I see no reason to go to it. 2.2 is still being maintained, security holes are still being fixed, syntax of the conf files do not change, and mod_perl works with it.

    In Ubuntu, in the default repositories, I think they are staying with the 2.2 branch, probably because of the aforementioned reasons. The syntax of the configuration files are really frustrating, because the results seem to be exactly the same. You just have to spend a couple hours learning how to make it behave in the exact same way that you already had it working, so hey, I mean, it's just your time, why copy over the old version when you can spend several hours reading documentation that you will forget in two weeks..

    I mean, appreciate free awesome software though. shrug

      don't be afraid to complain about free software even if you appreciate it (or don't), but make it mean something other than "waah choice"
        Don't complain about the way I complain
        Recap:
        2.4 breaks compatibility in several important ways
        2.4 mod_perl does not work
        2.4 you have to spend time learning the new configuration syntax
        
        2.2 Easy to upgrade
        2.2 Mod_perl works
        2.2 Still maintained, so no problems there
        2.2 #winning
        

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: perlquestion [id://1066270]
Approved by hdb
Front-paged by Corion
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others making s'mores by the fire in the courtyard of the Monastery: (14)
As of 2014-08-28 16:13 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    The best computer themed movie is:











    Results (264 votes), past polls