You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to apreq-dev@httpd.apache.org by Stas Bekman <st...@stason.org> on 2003/08/25 21:30:02 UTC
Re: [Mason] Can't locate object method "new" via package "Apache::Request"
[moving this to the apreq-dev list]
K Old wrote:
>>>>>[Mon Aug 25 08:49:12 2003] [error] Can't load
>>>>>'/home/admin/libapreq-1.2/blib/arch/auto/Apache/Cookie/Cookie.so' for
>>>>>module Apache::Cookie: libapreq.so.1: cannot open shared object file: No
>>>>>such file or directory at /usr/lib/perl5/5.6.1/i386-linux/DynaLoader.pm
>>>>>line 206.
>>>>>at /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.6.1/i386-linux/mod_perl.pm line 14
>>>>>Compilation failed in require at
>>>>>/home/admin/libapreq-1.2/t/response/TestApReq/big_input.pm line 9.
>>>>>BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at
>>>>>/home/admin/libapreq-1.2/t/response/TestApReq/big_input.pm line 9.
>>>>>Compilation failed in require at (eval 4) line 3.
>>>>
>>>>That's a known linking problem. It has been fixed in the cvs, get the cvs
>>>>instructions from http://httpd.apache.org/apreq/.
>>>>
>>>>Joe, may be a new 1.x version should be released?
[...]
>>That probably means that my patches weren't applied. K Old, see
>>http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apreq-dev&m=105965131008577&w=2
>>
>>Does it solve the problem for you?
>
>
> Stas,
>
> That did it! And to answer your question, no it doesn't look like your
> changes were committed.
Joe, Steve, so what was the outcome of the MM patching? I thought Steve has
supplied a better patch, but it looks like the problem is still there. Should
my patch go in?
Certainly need to fix this before making a new release.
__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@stason.org http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
Re: [Mason] Can't locate object method "new" via package "Apache::Request"
Posted by Stas Bekman <st...@stason.org>.
[please don't lose K Old from the CC, I'm not sure he is on this list]
Joe Schaefer wrote:
>>>>That probably means that my patches weren't applied. K Old, see
>>>>http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apreq-dev&m=105965131008577&w=2
>>>>
>>>>Does it solve the problem for you?
>>>
>>>Stas,
>>>That did it! And to answer your question, no it doesn't look like
>>>your changes were committed.
>>
>>Joe, Steve, so what was the outcome of the MM patching? I thought
>>Steve has supplied a better patch, but it looks like the problem is
>>still there.
>
>
> I have no problem with current cvs on linux, using either 5.8.0 (old MM)
> or 5.8.1-RC4 (new MM).
It works for me too:
K Old, can you test with the latest MakeMaker?
http://search.cpan.org/author/MSCHWERN/ExtUtils-MakeMaker-6.16/
We may need to require this version of MM.
>>Should my patch go in?
>
> I'm still very much against it, but I could be persuaded if
> a MacOSX user says it works there.
__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@stason.org http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
Re: [Mason] Can't locate object method "new" via package "Apache::Request"
Posted by Joe Schaefer <jo...@sunstarsys.com>.
Stas Bekman <st...@stason.org> writes:
> [moving this to the apreq-dev list]
>
> K Old wrote:
[...]
> >>That probably means that my patches weren't applied. K Old, see
> >>http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apreq-dev&m=105965131008577&w=2
> >>
> >>Does it solve the problem for you?
> > Stas,
> > That did it! And to answer your question, no it doesn't look like
> > your changes were committed.
>
> Joe, Steve, so what was the outcome of the MM patching? I thought
> Steve has supplied a better patch, but it looks like the problem is
> still there.
I have no problem with current cvs on linux, using either 5.8.0 (old MM)
or 5.8.1-RC4 (new MM).
> Should my patch go in?
I'm still very much against it, but I could be persuaded if
a MacOSX user says it works there.
--
Joe Schaefer