os-windows/5449: Binary install to Win98 fails to run, briefly flashes console.

[La...@hyperreal.org, Hank <CA...@aol.com>]

>Number:         5449
>Category:       os-windows
>Synopsis:       Binary install to Win98 fails to run, briefly flashes console.
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       critical
>Priority:       medium
>Responsible:    apache
>State:          open
>Class:          sw-bug
>Submitter-Id:   apache
>Arrival-Date:   Thu Dec  9 17:40:00 PST 1999
>Last-Modified:
>Originator:     CAMResearch@aol.com
>Organization:
apache
>Release:        1.3.9
>Environment:
Windows98, 500mz Pentium III, 512meg RAM
>Description:
First, let me say that I have read every correspondence in the bug reporting file from its inception.  My problem seems identical to bug report 2471.  Unfortunately, that poor guy was treated poorly and left abruptly.  We all know you do this gratis.  We do too.  It also seems that my problem is the same as bug report 3258.  Also unfortunately, that guy seems to have had some sort of weird situation with an Acrobat download/re-boot and claimed everything straightened out later but didn't tell us how.  I have been trying to install and run Apache on my Windows98 machine for three days.  The problem is identical to bug report 2471, with the program saying it can't find the local host name.  I have literally put two dozen or more different entries into the ServerName Directive, including 127.0.0.1, my own machine name, and everything else I could think of.  Today, I talked at length with three computer science professors at a local university and they each said they knew of no one who has ever gotten Apache to run on either Windows95 or Windows98.  They suggested either WindowsNT or, better yet a UNIX based system like LINUX.  This seems bizarre to me.  The Apache group is very open and forthright about Windows installations being tentative, but is such a statement misleading, at best?  I started programming with cards in the 1970s and I think I know a fair bit about what I'm doing.  I'm going to try the Remove Programs option suggested by the previous author, but I've downloaded three times now, having cleared all trace of Apache from my machine each time before proceeding with another download/install.  If this attempt fails, I'm going to try downloading 1.3.6 for no particular reason other than desperation.  If you really do want us all to throw away our copies of Windows and the thousands of dollars of software we have accumulated each year for the last 15 years, just say so; otherwise tell us how to run Apache on Windows98 and/or 95 in a way that is unambiguous, friendly, and clearly demonstrative of your superior knowledge.
>How-To-Repeat:
I believe it was repeated by the reporters of 2471 and 3258, and probably untold others for the last two years!  Just download the binary install program to a Windows98 machine anytime from December 5, 1999 onward.
>Fix:
Change from Windows98 to LINUX???
>Audit-Trail:
>Unformatted:
[In order for any reply to be added to the PR database, you need]
[to include <ap...@Apache.Org> in the Cc line and make sure the]
[subject line starts with the report component and number, with ]
[or without any 'Re:' prefixes (such as "general/1098:" or      ]
["Re: general/1098:").  If the subject doesn't match this       ]
[pattern, your message will be misfiled and ignored.  The       ]
["apbugs" address is not added to the Cc line of messages from  ]
[the database automatically because of the potential for mail   ]
[loops.  If you do not include this Cc, your reply may be ig-   ]
[nored unless you are responding to an explicit request from a  ]
[developer.  Reply only with text; DO NOT SEND ATTACHMENTS!     ]