mod_perl not to work with 5.6?

[Stas Bekman <st...@stason.org>]

Hey, who of the Perl teachers at Cruise said that?

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/network/2000/06/06/geekcruise.html
<QUOTE>
8.Perl 5.6, which seems like generally a very good thing, currently
doesn't work
in a mod_perl (i.e., Apache) context. This is a big problem for some
people.
</QUOTE>

I guess a correction and an apology are due... :)

I know that not everything is slick, but having such a bald claim...

_____________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman              JAm_pH     --   Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/       mod_perl Guide  http://perl.apache.org/guide 
mailto:stas@stason.org   http://perl.org     http://stason.org/TULARC
http://singlesheaven.com http://perlmonth.com http://sourcegarden.org

mod_perl not to work with 5.6?

["Reuven M. Lerner" <re...@lerner.co.il>]

>>>>> Stas Bekman writes:

  Stas> Hey, who of the Perl teachers at Cruise said that?

  Stas> <QUOTE> 
  Stas> 8.Perl 5.6, which seems like generally a very good thing,
  Stas> currently doesn't work in a mod_perl (i.e., Apache)
  Stas> context. This is a big problem for some people.
  Stas> </QUOTE>

  Stas> I guess a correction and an apology are due... :)

Given that Tim Bray (who co-invented XML and is an *amazing* speaker,
among other things) wrote the report from the Perl Whirl, and that his
report seems to reflect his interests and opinions, I'd guess that he
said it.

But I'll fess up: At my final Perl Whirl session, I talked about
mod_perl (and HTML::Mason) -- and I specifically told people that
there were all sorts of reports of instability between mod_perl and
Perl 5.6.0.

Indeed, if you look through the mod_perl list archives, you'll find
that there have been lots of postings in the last month or two
discussing problems between mod_perl and 5.6.  I'm not sure whether
the problem lies with one or the other, or with simple problems in the
interaction between the two programs.  But the problems do seem to
exist.

I haven't yet installed 5.6.0, even though some of the features are
incredibly cool, simply because I'm kinda chicken.  I've heard about
too many problems, particularly with mod_perl, Mason, and random other
things, to feel comfortable using it right now.  But hey, I would love
to be proven wrong on this subject.

Reuven

Re: mod_perl not to work with 5.6?

["Randal L. Schwartz" <me...@stonehenge.com>]

>>>>> "Stas" == Stas Bekman <st...@stason.org> writes:

Stas> Hey, who of the Perl teachers at Cruise said that?
Stas> http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/network/2000/06/06/geekcruise.html
Stas> <QUOTE>
Stas> 8.Perl 5.6, which seems like generally a very good thing, currently
Stas> doesn't work
Stas> in a mod_perl (i.e., Apache) context. This is a big problem for some
Stas> people.
Stas> </QUOTE>

Stas> I guess a correction and an apology are due... :)

I don't think it was me, unless it was a misquote.  From what I
understand, Perl 5.6 *threads* don't play well with mod_perl.  Is that
accurate?  But then again, 5.6 threads are semi-fragile anyway. :)

And wasn't some part of 5.6 broken with respect to HTML::Mason?
(Which of course concerns me greatly. :)

-- 
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<me...@stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!