On RedHat installation of mod_jk is as easy as:

# yum install httpd httpd-devel gcc gcc-c++

Go to http://tomcat.apache.org/download-connectors.cgi and download the
source code (I'm giving an example with 1.2.31 version)
# wget
# tar -xvzf tomcat-connectors-1.2.31-src.tar.gz

Read docs/webserver_howto/apache.html or native/BUILDING.txt for options.

# cd tomcat-connectors-1.2.31-src/native/
# which apxs
# ./configure --with-apxs=/usr/sbin/apxs --enable-api-compatibility
# make
# make install

You don't need any Java packages for that.

Also my way of installing JAVA on RedHat (Since many Apps support only Sun's

1. Go to http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.htmland
download latest Self Extracting Installer.

Put it all under /opt or any other dir. you choose.
[root@vera126 downloads]# ls -l /opt
-rw-r--r--  1 root root  85052342 May 19 11:15 jdk-6u25-linux-i586.bin
[root@vera126 downloads]# cd /opt

# sh jdk-6u25-linux-i586.bin
# ln -s jdk1.6.0_25 jdk

# updatedb;locate javac |grep bin
Here /opt/jdk is the actual JAVA_HOME for your machine. Note this as you
will need it to run the following commands.

alternatives --install /usr/bin/java java /opt/jdk/bin/java 100
alternatives --install /usr/bin/jar jar /opt/jdk/bin/jar 100
alternatives --install /usr/bin/javac javac /opt/jdk/bin/javac 100

Finally you should configure alternative to use Sun's JVM as the default
JVM. To do this type:
# /usr/sbin/alternatives --config java

In the future when we update Java, we only need to update this symlink (for

Last check:
[root@vera126 opt]# java -version
java version "1.6.0_25"
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_25-b06)
Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (build 20.0-b11, mixed mode, sharing)

I've already seen members of this list giving good tips on that.

Leon Kolchinsky

On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 18:23, André Warnier <a...@ice-sa.com> wrote:

> Hi.
> Recently, other people and myself were looking for a pre-packaged mod_jk
> binary for a RedHat RHELS system.
> As a result of some investigation (by Mark Eggers on one side, and an
> independent sysadmin of my customer on the other side), things seem to boil
> down to (largely quoted) :
> "
> In the RedHat product "Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server" (RHELS), there is
> no repository containing a pre-packaged mod_jk module.
> To obtain such a package, the client has to purchase the separate RedHat
> package "JBoss Enterprise Web Server", which contains mod_jk.
> "
> I would suppose that RedHat has good lawyers, and that they are "allowed"
> to do such a thing.  Personally, I find this a bit "cheeky", specially from
> a company that presents itself as a champion of Open Source.
> It is not an unmitigated feeling, because on the other hand I also
> recognise that mod_jk is a complex piece of software, and that supporting it
> for customers certainly has a cost.
> But whatever the real merits of my personal feelings in the matter,
> there are people (even sysadmins) who are comfortable with the idea of
> installing a software package from sources; but there are also many people
> who simply do not have the time to go through the hassle, and people who are
> uncomfortable with the installation of such packages (because of maintenance
> reasons, patches etc.), and people who are just not allowed to install
> anything that is not part of the standard corporate repository.
> In the practice thus, it probably means that a number of people will no
> longer use mod_jk on RHEL systems in the future, and I find this a pity,
> because even from a purely technical point of view, it is always better to
> have some alternatives.  And there are things which you can do with mod_jk,
> which you cannot with mod_proxy_ajp and/or mod_proxy_http (and probably
> vice-versa).
> Anyway, I wonder if anyone here has another opinion on the matter.
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
> users-unsubscribe@tomcat.**apache.org<users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org

Reply via email to