You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Marc Slemko <ma...@worldgate.com> on 1998/03/21 05:35:24 UTC
WIN32: is Apache supposed to set key itself?
Would it not be a good thing if Apache would set the registry key itself
when run with -i or something?
Re: WIN32: is Apache supposed to set key itself?
Posted by Marc Slemko <ma...@worldgate.com>.
On Sun, 22 Mar 1998, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> Paul Sutton wrote:
> >
> > Unfortunately there are a lot of NT people who've never had the experience
> > of working with Unix, so accept as normal the NT way of doing things (that
> > is why so many people still use NT despite the fact it requires reboots
> > every few days and whenever new software is installed, and cannot be
> > administred remotely). Adding multiple instance ability to Apache on NT
> > would be extra complexity for no benefit to the end users who are going to
> > use Apache.
>
> Fine; then let's clearly document that multiple instantiations on
> Win32 are NOT SUPPORTED. That will make me happier than trying to
> deal with the issue any other way, since it requires a significant
> amount of thought to get right (and even then may be ugly).
>
> Anyone have any problem with making this a documented restriction?
But they are supported, just not as services. This restriction is not
changed in the least by the addition of the ServerRoot registry entry and
was always there.
>
> #ken P-)}
>
> Ken Coar <http://Web.Golux.Com/coar/>
> Apache Group member <http://www.apache.org/>
> "Apache Server for Dummies" <http://WWW.Dummies.Com/
>
Re: WIN32: is Apache supposed to set key itself?
Posted by Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@Golux.Com>.
Paul Sutton wrote:
>
> Unfortunately there are a lot of NT people who've never had the experience
> of working with Unix, so accept as normal the NT way of doing things (that
> is why so many people still use NT despite the fact it requires reboots
> every few days and whenever new software is installed, and cannot be
> administred remotely). Adding multiple instance ability to Apache on NT
> would be extra complexity for no benefit to the end users who are going to
> use Apache.
Fine; then let's clearly document that multiple instantiations on
Win32 are NOT SUPPORTED. That will make me happier than trying to
deal with the issue any other way, since it requires a significant
amount of thought to get right (and even then may be ugly).
Anyone have any problem with making this a documented restriction?
#ken P-)}
Ken Coar <http://Web.Golux.Com/coar/>
Apache Group member <http://www.apache.org/>
"Apache Server for Dummies" <http://WWW.Dummies.Com/
Re: WIN32: is Apache supposed to set key itself?
Posted by Paul Sutton <pa...@c2.net>.
On Sat, 21 Mar 1998, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> Paul Sutton wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Mar 1998, Marc Slemko wrote:
> > > Would it not be a good thing if Apache would set the registry key itself
> > > when run with -i or something?
> >
> > Yes, it will do in 1.3b6
>
> Unforunately, there's still an issue with this: namely, the current apparent
> assumption that there will only be one Apache process running, and only one
> Apache configuration, on a Win32 system. That's certainly not a safe
> assumption to make for UNIX, and I don't think it's safe for Win32.
But hang on, you can't apply what is reasonable for Unix to Windows. We
all know that the registry is evil and makes things like running multiple
copies of software with different configurations all but impossible, but
it is the Windows way of doing things. There can only be one service
called "Apache" and only one entry in the registry per unique
key-version-number.
Unfortunately there are a lot of NT people who've never had the experience
of working with Unix, so accept as normal the NT way of doing things (that
is why so many people still use NT despite the fact it requires reboots
every few days and whenever new software is installed, and cannot be
administred remotely). Adding multiple instance ability to Apache on NT
would be extra complexity for no benefit to the end users who are going to
use Apache.
Paul
Re: WIN32: is Apache supposed to set key itself?
Posted by Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@Golux.Com>.
Paul Sutton wrote:
>
> On Fri, 20 Mar 1998, Marc Slemko wrote:
> > Would it not be a good thing if Apache would set the registry key itself
> > when run with -i or something?
>
> Yes, it will do in 1.3b6
Unforunately, there's still an issue with this: namely, the current apparent
assumption that there will only be one Apache process running, and only one
Apache configuration, on a Win32 system. That's certainly not a safe
assumption to make for UNIX, and I don't think it's safe for Win32.
We need registry keys for each configuration, and ways to identify which
key needs to be used (by things like the trayapp) to communicate with a
particular configuration.
#ken P-)}
Ken Coar <http://Web.Golux.Com/coar/>
Apache Group member <http://www.apache.org/>
"Apache Server for Dummies" <http://WWW.Dummies.Com/
Re: WIN32: is Apache supposed to set key itself?
Posted by Paul Sutton <pa...@c2.net>.
On Fri, 20 Mar 1998, Marc Slemko wrote:
> Would it not be a good thing if Apache would set the registry key itself
> when run with -i or something?
Yes, it will do in 1.3b6
Paul