On Thu, 2004-03-25 at 15:04 -0800, Stas Bekman wrote: > Philippe M. Chiasson wrote: > > On Thu, 2004-03-25 at 13:45 -0800, Stas Bekman wrote: > > > >>Even though there is no ambiguety between mp1's shared lib: libperl.so and > >>mp2's mod_perl.so, i think we should use mod_perl2.so, since eventually we > >>will have mp3 and also it's possible that there will be mp2.2 incompatible > >>with mp2. Thoughts? > > > > > > I think it's an excellent idea. +1 > > > > And we could possibly think of maintaining a sort of mod_perl.so -> > > mod_perl2.so symlink in the installation process (a-la ld.so) > > Why symlink, just use mod_perl2.so as is. we don't include version numbers > besides the major number, so it's not quite ala ld.so. > > We should do what mod_php does, since they have versioning for a long time > already. I think they just use mod_php4.so, no? I don't have it installed.
Yes, mod_php just uses major version numbers, and unless I am mistaking, you could _even_ have mod_php3 and mod_php4 loaded in your webserver at the same time ;-) > __________________________________________________________________ > Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker > http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com > http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
