> Curious. Still, reliable (software) technology doesn't have to be > updated. This topic blew up
Sorry. It just looked like nothing was happening with these various tools. For example: The SpeedyCGI/PersistentPerl web site has binaries for download which are ancient. The fastcgi site's FAQ has a "what is fastcgi?" placeholder that hasn't been completed. Things like that give the impression there isn't much user base. For example, if someone heard of fastcgi how would they find the FCGI module? For the life of me, I can't figure out how to find it on CPAN without already knowing where it is. :) Taken as a sum I gather impressions. That's all. > in order to choose what > to abandon Windows in favour of. To say Ubuntu was a f***ing shambles > would be to glorify it. I posted a very long explanation on the Ubuntu > forum's installation survey at the time. I chose Debian. Case closed. I've not had any problems with Ubuntu. But, I just use the server distribution. I should probably use CentOS as a more serious server distro. But, I like how Ubuntu has broad (fanatical?) user support. I notice the speedyCGI package is in the Debian repository too. That might be where Ubuntu got it. (wink). I didn't realize you only tested fastcgi (not an active user). SpeedyCGI and "pperl" on CPAN) (if they work) seem to be more transparent. They don't require a lot of change to the script (just the shebang line). They have options to automatically terminate after a number of executions, or amount of time. I've have code these tests into my fastcgi "accept" loop (which is already a significant modification to non-fastcgi processing.). Mark ##### CGI::Application community mailing list ################ ## ## ## To unsubscribe, or change your message delivery options, ## ## visit: http://www.erlbaum.net/mailman/listinfo/cgiapp ## ## ## ## Web archive: http://www.erlbaum.net/pipermail/cgiapp/ ## ## Wiki: http://cgiapp.erlbaum.net/ ## ## ## ################################################################