You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tomcat.apache.org by Henri Gomez <hg...@apache.org> on 2003/06/27 11:43:43 UTC

[TRICK] mod_jk build on Redhat 8.0 / 9.0 

Under Redhat 8.0/9.0, the Apache 2.0 installed is 2.0.40 with
security fixes.

But the apxs is still the one from 2.0.40 so the apxs -q LIBTOOL,
used in configure didn't works.

A solution for RH users to build jk 1.2.4 is :

./buildconf.sh
./configure --with-apxs=/usr/sbin/apxs
make LIBTOOL=/etc/httpd/build/libtool
cp apache-2.0/mod_jk.so /usr/lib/httpd/modules

For your information, the jpackage project (www.jpackage.org), is 
working on releasing binary rpms for jk and jk2 for many Linux 
distribtuions (i386, ppc, RH/MDK...)

Regards




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org

Re: [TRICK] mod_jk build on Redhat 8.0 / 9.0

Posted by John Turner <to...@johnturner.com>.
Good tip...thanks!

John

On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 11:43:43 +0200, Henri Gomez <hg...@apache.org> wrote:

> Under Redhat 8.0/9.0, the Apache 2.0 installed is 2.0.40 with
> security fixes.
>
> But the apxs is still the one from 2.0.40 so the apxs -q LIBTOOL,
> used in configure didn't works.
>
> A solution for RH users to build jk 1.2.4 is :
>
> ./buildconf.sh
> ./configure --with-apxs=/usr/sbin/apxs
> make LIBTOOL=/etc/httpd/build/libtool
> cp apache-2.0/mod_jk.so /usr/lib/httpd/modules
>
> For your information, the jpackage project (www.jpackage.org), is working 
> on releasing binary rpms for jk and jk2 for many Linux distribtuions 
> (i386, ppc, RH/MDK...)
>
> Regards
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>



-- 
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-user-help@jakarta.apache.org

Re: Why Redhat 8.0 / 9.0 still use 2.0.40 (+ security fixes)

Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
At 06:47 AM 6/27/2003, Mark J Cox wrote:
>> For those who wonder why Redhat didn't update Apache 2.0 in distro
>> 8.0 and 9.0, just read :
>> 
>> http://www.redhat.com/advice/speaks_backport.html
>
>Apache httpd was an example that I happened to remember when writing that
>explanation - Apache is far from the worst offender to mix security
>updates with other changes in a new release ;)

This is a good example of why Jeff Trawick and I spent many posts arguing
the benefits of maintaining binary compatibility from update to update within
the remaining releases of Apache 2.0 :-)

Unfortunately, that doesn't help 2.0.40 deployments or earlier.

Bill





---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org

Re: Why Redhat 8.0 / 9.0 still use 2.0.40 (+ security fixes)

Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
At 06:47 AM 6/27/2003, Mark J Cox wrote:
>> For those who wonder why Redhat didn't update Apache 2.0 in distro
>> 8.0 and 9.0, just read :
>> 
>> http://www.redhat.com/advice/speaks_backport.html
>
>Apache httpd was an example that I happened to remember when writing that
>explanation - Apache is far from the worst offender to mix security
>updates with other changes in a new release ;)

This is a good example of why Jeff Trawick and I spent many posts arguing
the benefits of maintaining binary compatibility from update to update within
the remaining releases of Apache 2.0 :-)

Unfortunately, that doesn't help 2.0.40 deployments or earlier.

Bill

Re: Why Redhat 8.0 / 9.0 still use 2.0.40 (+ security fixes)

Posted by Henri Gomez <hg...@apache.org>.
Mark J Cox wrote:
>>For those who wonder why Redhat didn't update Apache 2.0 in distro
>>8.0 and 9.0, just read :
>>
>>http://www.redhat.com/advice/speaks_backport.html
> 
> 
> Apache httpd was an example that I happened to remember when writing that
> explanation - Apache is far from the worst offender to mix security
> updates with other changes in a new release ;)
> 

Hi Mark,

I understand your concern, and also the quantity of works to release
all the related modules (php, mod_perl...), but there is many users
who need latest Apache 2.0 since they have to use extended 
functionnalities (ie mod_deflate logs) or because some modules
need them.

The problem we encountered in mod_jk was that in 2.0.40 there is
no support for apxs -q LIBTOOL and so users couldn't built mod_jk 1.2.4
under Redhat 8.0 or 9.0 (I sent a TRICK to tomcat-dev and tomcat-user 
lists to overcome this limitation).

I get a least one mail by day from happy users for my 'alternate apache 
rpm' provided at falsehope.com (apache 2.0.46 with mpm).

http://rpmfind.net//linux/RPM/falsehope/home/gomez/apache2/apache2-2.0.46-1.7.2.i386.html


Regards

Re: Why Redhat 8.0 / 9.0 still use 2.0.40 (+ security fixes)

Posted by Mark J Cox <ma...@awe.com>.
> For those who wonder why Redhat didn't update Apache 2.0 in distro
> 8.0 and 9.0, just read :
> 
> http://www.redhat.com/advice/speaks_backport.html

Apache httpd was an example that I happened to remember when writing that
explanation - Apache is far from the worst offender to mix security
updates with other changes in a new release ;)

Mark
--
Mark J Cox ........................................... www.awe.com/mark
Apache Software Foundation ..... OpenSSL Group ..... Apache Week editor

Re: Why Redhat 8.0 / 9.0 still use 2.0.40 (+ security fixes)

Posted by Mark J Cox <ma...@awe.com>.
> For those who wonder why Redhat didn't update Apache 2.0 in distro
> 8.0 and 9.0, just read :
> 
> http://www.redhat.com/advice/speaks_backport.html

Apache httpd was an example that I happened to remember when writing that
explanation - Apache is far from the worst offender to mix security
updates with other changes in a new release ;)

Mark
--
Mark J Cox ........................................... www.awe.com/mark
Apache Software Foundation ..... OpenSSL Group ..... Apache Week editor



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org

Why Redhat 8.0 / 9.0 still use 2.0.40 (+ security fixes)

Posted by Henri Gomez <hg...@apache.org>.
For those who wonder why Redhat didn't update Apache 2.0 in distro
8.0 and 9.0, just read :

http://www.redhat.com/advice/speaks_backport.html



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org

Why Redhat 8.0 / 9.0 still use 2.0.40 (+ security fixes)

Posted by Henri Gomez <hg...@apache.org>.
For those who wonder why Redhat didn't update Apache 2.0 in distro
8.0 and 9.0, just read :

http://www.redhat.com/advice/speaks_backport.html