This is a perfect explanation.. thanks!!
R.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jan Labanowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 3:29 PM
Subject: RE: mod_jk.so differences
> It seems like you can either be correct or you have to make it easy for
> people who refuse to read the background information.
>
> "mod_jk-eapi.so" is for the EAPI (Extended Application Programming
Interface) of
> Apache. You USUALLY need the EAPI when you install mod_ssl module for
Apache.
> But you can have Apache EAPI without having mod_ssl installed/loaded.
> So, you can have the combinations:
>
> Apache + EAPI + (no mod_ssl) + mod_jk-eapi.so
>
> and you can have the combination
>
> Apache + EAPI + mod_ssl + mod_jk-eapi.so
>
>
>
> But you cannot have combination
>
> Apache + (no EAPI) + mod_ssl + mod_jk-eapi.so
>
> or
>
> Apache + (no EAPI) + mod_jk-eapi.so
>
>
> But you can have:
>
> Apache + (no EAPI) + mod_jk-noeapi.so
>
> In other words, it is not if mod_ssl installed with Apache.
> It is if Apache was patched to use EAPI. So the mod_jk-eapi.so is a
correct
> name, and mod_jk-ssl.so is not, since mod_jk variant does not depend on
ssl
> presence in Apache.
>
> Jan
>
>
> On Wed, 29 Aug 2001, Michael Weissenbacher wrote:
>
> > >How many times I have answered to that ?
> > >eapi is for apache compiled with mod_ssl
> > >noeapi for std apache
> >
> > so why not name mod_jk-eapi.so -> mod_jk-ssl.so?
> >
> > michael
> >
>
> Jan K. Labanowski | phone: 614-292-9279, FAX: 614-292-7168
> Ohio Supercomputer Center | Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 1224 Kinnear Rd, | http://www.ccl.net/chemistry.html
> Columbus, OH 43212-1163 | http://www.osc.edu/
>
