I have not had any problems integrating tomcat w/ RH9 and Apache 2. Here is my write up on how to do this:
http://www.meritonlinesystems.com/docs/apache_tomcat_redhat.html Granted, I'm not using mod_jk2, so maybe that is why I had no trouble. I have always heard it's better to compile Apache from source vs. using the rpms, but no one has ever quantified the advantages to doing this. Until someone does, and the advantages of compiling from source outweigh the advantages I've listed below for using the rpms, I still recommend using the rpms. There must be advantages to compiling Apache from source. Anyone want to be the advocate for this and explain why/when to compile from source? Thank you, Mike On Sun, 2003-10-05 at 12:09, Chong Yu Meng wrote: > Hi Mike ! > > I guess the best way to test my theory is to try integrating Tomcat with > Apache 2 yourself. There are real benefits for using RH's rpms, but if > the integration takes too much effort, it may not be worth it. I haven't > touched Tomcat for about 4 months now, but when I was working on my > document for integrating Tomcat and Apache way back in May, I remember > having considerable trouble with RH9's Apache 2, which led me to use > Falsehope's rpms instead. > > Regards, > pascal chong > > > Mike Millson wrote: > > >There are two compelling benefits to installing the RedHat rpms: > >1) Updates and bug fixes can be installed automatically from the Red Hat > >Network (https://rhn.redhat.com/). > >2) Startup and shutdown scripts are already configured and available. > > > >I would like to weigh these benefits against any specific disadvantages > >to using the RedHat rpms. > > > >I know, this is a tomcat list, but I think it's relevant. > > > >Thank you, > >Mike > > > >On Sun, 2003-10-05 at 10:38, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > >>I am using RH9 with the Apache2 that comes with it. Recently I've installed > >>Tomcat5 with mod_jk2 without too many problems (jakarta-tomcat-5.0.7.tar.gz and > >> mod_jk2-ap20-2.0.1-1jpp.i386.rpm). Proper configuration of workers2.properties > >>and jk2.properties is essential I believe. I got a few sites running as virtual > >>hosts on Apache2 as well as on Tomcat5 and everything seems to be fine so far. > >> > >>http://archive.apache.org/dist/jakarta/tomcat-5/v5.0.7-alpha/bin/ > >>http://archive.apache.org/dist/jakarta/tomcat-connectors/jk2/v2.0.1/rpms/ > >>-> http://archive.apache.org/dist/jakarta/tomcat-connectors/jk2/v2.0.1/doc/ > >> > >>Cheers, > >>Bart > >> > >>Quoting Mike Millson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> > >> > >> > >>>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 > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
