There was a problem with the SSL code released with 2.0.35. I'd wait for 2.0.36 as it has been fixed there. I believe also that someone was testing the Windows Installer setup for 2.0.x. Maybe on the next round, SSL will be installed and you can configure them post installation...
Johannes Artur Bertscheit wrote: > Andrew Lietzow wrote: > >>Can't tell you much about a binary for NT. That's probably quite low on the >>marketing development list as there are not too many >>Apaches running on NT. >> > Apache 2.0 is annouced to work on windows NT - including SSL: > > "This version of Apache is known to work on ... Windows.... > the initial release of Apache is expected to perform equally well on > all supported platforms." > > >http://searchwebmanagement.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid27_gci817631,00.html > *"Apache 2.0 - A threat to Microsoft's IIS?* > By *Karen Guglielmo, site editor - 17 Apr 2002, **SearchWebManagement* > Experts agree that one of the biggest improvements to the latest > release of Apache 2.0 is its compatibility with Windows" > "The GA version of Apache 2. 0 [running on Windows] is equal in > performance to IIS running on Windows. The performance wasn't there > before. It wasn't an intuitive interface to use Apache on Windows." > "Another visible improvement to Apache 2.0 is its SSL support. With > version 1.3, getting SSL support was very difficult. However, with > 2.0, it's included, right out of the box. " > > >>(Please point me to marketing data, should I be >>incorrect in this statement). I'm surprised they invest any time at all, >>let alone developing a binary. >> > Please look > http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/sdata/200203/index.html > there you can see (for https-servers): > Apache has 53.33% > Microsoft has 29.89% > So I think almost 30% with hosts running windows is a not so tiny > market for a apache running on windows. > >>I do know that it compiled quite nicely on SuSE 7.3 Linux with only two >>tries. I have pulled a little hair out in the past, with some lower level >>versions, but IMO, the new 2.0.35 is very easy to install with mod_ssl >>enabled, on a platform where it will plug-n-play. So, if you get tired >>with Win NT, for about 80-160 bucks you can come back from the dark side... >> > I have no choice - I must use windows NT - because of the customer / > the project. > > I would appreciate to work on LINUX but I CAN NOT ! > >>The porters can help you, because they are very patient souls who want to >>see the market expand for Apache and mod_ssl. >> > So maybe one of the windows porters has available one binary of the > stuff they ported? > > > Johannes > > ______________________________________________________________________ Apache Interface to OpenSSL (mod_ssl) www.modssl.org User Support Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
