On Friday 25 September 2009 10:01:04 am William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > Ricardo Cantu wrote: > > Came across something else in testing mod_fcgid. mod_fastcgi would > > consider every symbolic link to the same program as a unique program and > > would start it up based on the program name and not the inode/device > > node. Since mod_fcgid only was checking inode/device node, symbolic links > > were considered the same as the real program. Does anybody think that is > > a needed behaviour? Why would you rename the program name and still want > > to consider it the same program? Either way I made a patch that can > > retain the old behaviour via a directive. If it's decided that the old > > behaviour is unneeded I can take the directive out and make it respect > > program name by default. I included the patch for review and if every > > thing is cool I'll write the xml for the new directive. > > Under unix, programs often change behavior based on argv[0], so the patch > isn't really valid if the program filename isn't the same :( >
That's the problem with mod_fcgid right now with out the patch. argv[0] is different but mod_fcgid is not considering it different. It is lumping together by inode only and not paying attention to basename (argv[0]). Which can be different when using symbolic links. The patch is so it can properly respect your statement. > Under unix, programs often change behavior based on argv[0] Here's the problem. If you have two different programs. Program1 and Program2. They will have separate FCGIDDefaultMaxClassProcessCount which is correct. If you have one program: Program1 and then: -- Computer Services Ricardo Cantu Vice President Home office 3506 Buchanan St Suite C Wichita Falls, TX 76308 (940) 696-3010 El Paso branch 1644 Ronnie Reif Dr. El Paso, TX 79936 (915) 219-7119
