The following reply was made to PR general/908; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: "Pierce, Jonathan A" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Brian Behlendorf'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
        "'Alexei Kosut'"
         <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: general/908: Is there a plan to include support for Active  Server 
Pages in the Apache server for NT?
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 08:29:15 -0700

 
 Understandable about the undocumented calls. Are you working with anyone
 at Microsoft on interoperability?
 
 If this is a feature that you do plan to implement, I would be willing
 to clear up a dev machine for some test scenarios.  Most of my work is
 ASP and ISAPI based, and I am a strong advocate of "platform diversity"
 in development, so your server interests me.
 
 
 >----------
 >From:         Alexei Kosut[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 >Sent:         Friday, August 01, 1997 11:23 AM
 >To:   Brian Behlendorf
 >Cc:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
 >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 >Subject:      Re: general/908: Is there a plan to include support for Active
 >Server Pages in the Apache server for NT?
 >
 >On Fri, 1 Aug 1997, Brian Behlendorf wrote:
 >
 >> At 03:00 AM 8/1/97 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 >> >Some people have been looking at it.  It is a desirable feature.
 >> >So it may be supported ... it depends on how easy it is to coax
 >> >certain programs to co-operate.
 >> 
 >> We actually think it may be possible /today/ with the ISAPI module we've
 >> done for the NT port, since ASP is implemented as an ISAPI extension.  In
 >> fact it might make a good test case for the ISAPI work we've done,
 >> discounting the possibility that the ASP engine relies on undocumented
 >> Microsoft calls :)  
 >> 
 >> Jonathan, if you'd like to download the NT port and give this a try, we'd
 >> love to hear if it works....
 >
 >It doesn't. I've tried it. The ASP extension fails its initialization
 >call, probably because it tries to activate a MS-specific extension or
 >something, and is unable to.
 >
 >I haven't looked into it much, because it would probably involve tracing
 >through the execution of the ASP DLL, and that wouldn't be very
 >feasible.
 >
 >-- Alexei Kosut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 >
 >
 

Reply via email to