I have heard the claims before about not using the default Apache that comes w/ RH 9, but I have never seen any concrete evidence for not doing this. Do you have any specifics such as articles or facts that show the downside of using the default Apache that comes w/ RH?
Thank you, Mike On Sat, 2003-10-04 at 21:54, Chong Yu Meng wrote: > Hi Dave, > > Do NOT use the default Apache that comes with RH9 ! According to some > reports, there are some serious bugs inside it. I'm using RH9, but my > Apache comes from Falsehope.com > (http://ftp.falsehope.com/home/gomez/apache2/). It takes a bit of > tweaking, but you can get the Falsehope rpm to play nice with Tomcat. > > Regards, > pascal chong > > > Dave Thomas wrote: > > >We have an application that we have been suing Apache 1.3 with Tomcat > >3.3 with for a while and I would like to test out using our app with > >Tomcat 4 and RedHats default install of Apache 2. I have found a few > >'how tos' on the subject but they all seem to be a bit dated and do not > >apply to the current release of Tomcat and mod_jk2. Can anyone suggest > >any docs or offer any info on this subject? > > > >Also, how if the performance for Tomcat 4 vs Tomcat 3? > > > >Thanks for any info, > >Dave Thomas > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
