You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to modperl@perl.apache.org by Matt Sergeant <ma...@sergeant.org> on 2000/07/26 09:52:27 UTC
EVERYTHING=1
Why can't we make EVERYTHING=1 the default? It just seems so much more
sensible to me... (I get a lot of problems with people having compiled a
default mod_perl and who don't have Apache::Log).
--
<Matt/>
Fastnet Software Ltd. High Performance Web Specialists
Providing mod_perl, XML, Sybase and Oracle solutions
Email for training and consultancy availability.
http://sergeant.org | AxKit: http://axkit.org
Re: EVERYTHING=1
Posted by Ask Bjoern Hansen <as...@valueclick.com>.
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> > MS> Why can't we make EVERYTHING=1 the default? It just seems so much more
> > MS> sensible to me... (I get a lot of problems with people having compiled a
> > MS> default mod_perl and who don't have Apache::Log).
> >
> > I think it is safe to do so now. At one point, there were features
> > that were unstable/broken that would get built, which is why it wasn't
> > the default before.
>
> Those are the ones under EXPERIMENTAL=1, aren't they? (actually are there
> any experimental features actually enabled with that option?)
yes.
my %experimental = map { $_,1 } qw{
PERL_AUTOPRELOAD
PERL_DSO_UNLOAD
PERL_STARTUP_DONE_CHECK
PERL_RUN_XS
PERL_MARK_WHERE
DO_INTERNAL_REDIRECT
PERL_TIE_SCRIPTNAME
PERL_STASH_POST_DATA
XS_IMPORT
PERL_SAFE_STARTUP
PERL_DEFAULT_OPMASK
PERL_ORALL_OPMASK
};
- ask
--
ask bjoern hansen - <http://www.netcetera.dk/~ask/>
more than 70M impressions per day, <http://valueclick.com>
Re: EVERYTHING=1
Posted by Matt Sergeant <ma...@sergeant.org>.
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Vivek Khera wrote:
> >>>>> "MS" == Matt Sergeant <ma...@sergeant.org> writes:
>
> MS> Why can't we make EVERYTHING=1 the default? It just seems so much more
> MS> sensible to me... (I get a lot of problems with people having compiled a
> MS> default mod_perl and who don't have Apache::Log).
>
> I think it is safe to do so now. At one point, there were features
> that were unstable/broken that would get built, which is why it wasn't
> the default before.
Those are the ones under EXPERIMENTAL=1, aren't they? (actually are there
any experimental features actually enabled with that option?)
--
<Matt/>
Fastnet Software Ltd. High Performance Web Specialists
Providing mod_perl, XML, Sybase and Oracle solutions
Email for training and consultancy availability.
http://sergeant.org | AxKit: http://axkit.org
Re: EVERYTHING=1
Posted by Vivek Khera <kh...@kciLink.com>.
>>>>> "MS" == Matt Sergeant <ma...@sergeant.org> writes:
MS> Why can't we make EVERYTHING=1 the default? It just seems so much more
MS> sensible to me... (I get a lot of problems with people having compiled a
MS> default mod_perl and who don't have Apache::Log).
I think it is safe to do so now. At one point, there were features
that were unstable/broken that would get built, which is why it wasn't
the default before.
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Vivek Khera, Ph.D. Khera Communications, Inc.
Internet: khera@kciLink.com Rockville, MD +1-301-545-6996
GPG & MIME spoken here http://www.khera.org/~vivek/
Re: EVERYTHING=1
Posted by Kenneth Lee <ke...@alfacomtech.com>.
i agree, i always use EVERYTHING=1 so that i don't have to recompile
mod_perl for specific modules.
Matt Sergeant wrote:
>
> Why can't we make EVERYTHING=1 the default? It just seems so much more
> sensible to me... (I get a lot of problems with people having compiled a
> default mod_perl and who don't have Apache::Log).
>
> --
> <Matt/>
>