At 16:23 26.06.2002, Stas Bekman wrote: >Stas Bekman wrote: >>As you can see at the attached below correspondance, some people try to >>use Apache::compat without having mod_perl 1.0 installed, and things >>don't work as expected. So at least this patch hints on how to solve the >>problem. > >So while this patch is a step forward, it's still not satisfactory, >because if mod_perl 1.0 is not installed, Apache::Module won't compile.
Question: does Apache::Module even *work* the way you are expecting here? Because as mod_perl 2.0 and Apache 2.0 are quite different from the 1.0 versions, I would suspect Apache::Module to be quite off the mark here, right? >Ideas? Should Apache::compat require mod_perl 1.0? Problem: people will probably want to use Apache::module on many mod_perl 2.0 installations, just to be able to use the old modules, and will just leave it on as it doesn't do any harm. So now *mod_perl 2.0* ends up requiring mod_perl 1.0? Bad. Some parts of Apache::compat might require it, but not *all* of it. -- Per Einar Ellefsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
