This is the mail archive of the cygwin-apps mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
Reini Urban wrote:Max Bowsher schrieb:Reini Urban wrote:I do not see how it would be useful for apache2.I want to contribute and maintain the fastcgi library. I compiled it just as static library, which is useful for apache2, lighttpd, ruby, php and clisp. Maybe I might be persuaded to maintain a dll (libfcgi0) also.
Why a static library? To gain the benefits of smaller overall package size, and of not needing to rebuild dependent packages to pick up new library versions, I'd suggest _only_ shipping a DLL.Well I was toying with this plan also. But found out that linux packages don't use it.
fcgi is not a enduser package, only a developer library to enable several packages to cooperate in a different way, so I prefered to keep everything together and let packages link the lib statically. This way upgrades and conflict resolutions only have to be made on protocol changes, not software upgrades.
I don't understand this at all. *Lots* of non-enduser software is provided as DLLs. I don't understand what you mean by "upgrades and conflict resolutions" in particular.
To my mind, a DLL is strongly preferable, because all packages using the library pick up any fixes automatically, instead of requiring a recompilation themselves.
E.g. mandrake, suse and PLD have their mod_fastcgi.so without libfcgi dependency, linked statically. debian's libapache2-mod-fastcgi_2.4.2 also. mandrake's php-fgci also, all clisp's also. haven't looked further. http://rpmseek.com/rpm/php-fcgi-5.1.2-1mdk.i586.html?hl=de&cs=fcgi:PN:0:0:1:0:2604182
Sorry, but the above is entirely wrong. mod_fastcgi does not use libfcgi at all.
Say a standalone /usr/lib/apache2/mod_fastcgi.so for apache2-mod_fastcgi or /usr/lib/apache/mod_fastcgi.dll for apache-mod_fastcgi, without libfcgi0 require, talking to a fcgi enabled ruby, clisp or php. clisp being the only cygwin package so far which actually has it enabled.
What are you trying to say? The above paragraph isn't meaningful English.
The other reason is this: I don't only develop on cygwin, I also run business services like clisp or xapian and swish cgi's with cygwin1.dll, but I wouldn't bother to use the cygwin apache. For testing and development it's great, similar to postgresql. So I don't want to mix a native apache-mod_fastcgi with a cygwin fcgi using a shared libfcgi0. Makes no sense.
The above paragraph makes no sense, too.
/var/www/ is not a natural location, in my opinion. It is certainly NOT a good location on Cygwin to install anything that is webserver-agnostic, as it has a long tradition of being associated with the Apache 1.3 package. The latest FHS is fairly emphatic about service data belonging in /srv/, not /var/.
Not /usr/share/. You should put them in /usr/lib/fcgi/examples/.
I usually run fcgi's and cgi's on win32-native apache2 and lighttpd.How is this relevant to the Cygwin package layout?
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |