On Mon, 2004-02-09 at 16:41, Charles Daniel wrote: > Nicholas: > > Give up trying to use Apache2 with mod_jk. After spending days on the message > boards trying to solve this one, I was ultimately told by the so-called "experts" > that "I had a network configuration problem and that some process was likely to be > either already using or blocking port 8009". > > Poppy-Cock! Boulder Dash! I decided to attempt installing JK2 on the same server > just to see if it would work. Guess what? JK2 and Apache2 worked on my first > attempt. So much for getting advice from the EXPERTS! JK2 is not recommended if > you are in a production environment however. JK2 is too young and untested for > production environments and exploitable bugs and stability problems may arise. > > If you are building a production system -or- you just insist on using mod_jk then > revert back to Apache 1.x. w/ mod_jk. Otherwise you may never get your server > working. > > That's just the opinion of one who has suffered long enough with the Apache2 mod_jk > SNAFFU. IMHO that combo just doesn't work together inspite of what Apache says. And > if anybody thinks I'm wrong then they had ample time to help me when I was posting > help requests concerning this issue all over the www. As it stands few would touch > it with a ten foot pole. And the few who did were wrong. > > Osensei > [EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Daniel: Thanks for your reply. Honestly, I was getting to the point where I was going to give it one more day and then try using apache 1.x instead. Thanks for taking the time. I appreciate it. -Nick -- +---------------------------------------------------------------+ | Nicholas Bernstein | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | UNIX Systems Administrator | http://www.docmagic.com | | Document Systems Inc. | | | gpg: F706 8C4E 78FA DDDD 53A0 019F D983 FE28 2002 D1F3 | +---------------------------------------------------------------+
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
