I've got mod_jk working, not mod_jk2. But I did finally get mod_jk2 compiled (between myself and another). I asked the other guy to take notes so we could repeat it with a howto in mind, but he hasn't given the notes to me yet.
If someone has a "sample" mod_jk2 configuration using a vanilla apache2.x and tomcat4.x then I can add that to the end of it. When I get it that is. The old version of mod_jk I was able to get to compile by just making a minor code tweak, but with the new ant build I'm not sure where it's at. I may even have it compiled, but I haven't (to be completely honest) looked. Been too busy with work to play lately. --mikej -=----- mike jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -----Original Message----- > From: Turner, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 11:23 AM > To: 'Tomcat Users List' > Subject: RE: mod_jk2 vs. the others (was: mod_webapp random error) > > > > If you've got it working, stick with it, and while you're at it, > how about a > config HOWTO? Lots of JK2 problems recently on the list. ;) > > John > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mike Jackson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 2:18 PM > > To: Tomcat Users List > > Subject: RE: mod_jk2 vs. the others (was: mod_webapp random error) > > > > > > Hmm, ok, seems like the consensus is to use mod_jk for now. > > Now I'll just > > have to get that to compile under unixware (not the easiest > > thing in the > > world). > > > > Also, on a somewhat related thought, is there anyone else out > > there running > > apache+tomcat on unixware? I'd like to compare problems from > > time to time. > > > > --mikej > > -=----- > > mike jackson > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Turner, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 11:13 AM > > > To: 'Tomcat Users List' > > > Subject: RE: mod_jk2 vs. the others (was: mod_webapp random error) > > > > > > > > > > > > JK2 is technically best with Apache 2 because of the pre-fork issue. > > > > > > JK works with both Apache 1.3 and 2. > > > > > > John > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Mike Jackson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 2:06 PM > > > > To: Tomcat Users List > > > > Subject: RE: mod_jk2 vs. the others (was: mod_webapp random error) > > > > > > > > > > > > Should I be using mod_jk with apache 2.x? I thought that mod_jk2 > > > > was for apache 2.x mostly, and that mod_jk was geared more towards > > > > use with apache 1.3.x. > > > > > > > > For that matter I've had all sorts of fun getting mod_jk2 to work, > > > > but mod_jk is easy... > > > > > > > > --mikej > > > > -=----- > > > > mike jackson > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Turner, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 10:54 AM > > > > > To: 'Tomcat Users List' > > > > > Subject: RE: mod_jk2 vs. the others (was: mod_webapp > > random error) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I wouldn't use mod_webapp at all. > > > > > > > > > > JK (mod_jk) has lots of features over mod_webapp: > > > > > > > > > > - ability to load balance > > > > > - ability to separate static content from dynamic content > > > > > - and more, search the archives, this is a FAQ > > > > > > > > > > JK2 is the "newer" version of JK. It's where the dev team > > > > is focusing its > > > > > efforts. So, going forward, the recommended choices are mod_jk > > > > > and mod_jk2. > > > > > Which you use is up to you. > > > > > > > > > > John > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Diego Algorta Casamayou > > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 1:50 PM > > > > > > To: Tomcat Users List > > > > > > Subject: mod_jk2 vs. the others (was: mod_webapp random error) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any experience with mod_jk2? > > > > > > > > > > > > Does it everything mod_jk and mod_webapp can do? > > > > > > > > > > > > If it's newer, why should I use mod_jk or mod_webapp instead > > > > > > of mod_jk2? > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > From: "Chris Davies" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > To: "Tomcat Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 12:56 PM > > > > > > Subject: Re: mod_webapp random error > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've never had this problem with mod_webapp, it sounds > > > > very strange. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you possibly can, switch to mod_jk. I think I'm right in > > > > > > saying that > > > > > > most > > > > > > > people consider mod_webapp as hackish, and certainly > > > > > > inferior to jk/jk2. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I find it useful because it is so well documented I can > > > > > > extend it with > > > > > > very > > > > > > > little effort, but it may not be suited to a production > > > > environment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > C.Davies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quoting Diego Algorta Casamayou > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, it's listening on port 8008. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The thing is that it WORKS OK "almost everytime" :-/ BUT, > > > > > > sometimes and > > > > > > > > without apparent reason it stops working and I have to > > > > > > restart apache > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > tomcat to get it working again. SOMETIMES it works just > > > > > > waiting about 10 > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > 15 seconds and reloading the page. It's really annoying > > > > > > because it's a > > > > > > > > random behavior. Sometimes I can reproduce the error when > > > > > > I reppeatidly > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > quickly (sure bad english writing) reload the page. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is my server.xml file (real IP replaced with > > > > xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bytes > > > > > > > > DAC > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > 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] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > 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] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
