> 1. I was wondering, for simplicity sake, should we not compile the > apache httpd in the same way for both MPM models. This would allow us to > use same configure script and change only line '--with-mpm' depending on > which model we build. This way, going forward, if we need to add another > MPM support (say Solaris specific), we don't introduce any different > compilation options.
Sure, we can do that. > 2. In your prototype, did you explore the need to bundle apxs separately > (one for prefork and worker) ? No, I didn't. Test suite uses this script and it worked fine with the common one. > Say a customer wanting to compile his third party apache module - foo , does > he need to know what is the MPM > model currently configured ? I am hoping that this is transparent to > the customer and can simply use apxs irrespective of the MPM mode. But, > just wanted to ensure that we took this issue into account. > The var within config_vars.mk that varies for prefork and worker is MPM_NAME (which will be set to "prefork" or "worker" mpm mode) and progname (will be set to "httpd"). apxs uses "progname" var to check if the server has been build with mod_so module and also to use server's default .conf file (httpd.conf). Since both these mpms are built with mod_so, check succeeds. As I had mentioned in my previous mail, I do see some differences in the files. I have attached the list of files which differ and are new. Would this mean bundling 2 sets of these differing files, one for prefork and one for worker ? Thanks and Regards, Seema. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: worker_prefork_files.diff Type: text/x-patch Size: 1881 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/webstack-discuss/attachments/20070813/cd3c8d3e/attachment.bin>
