This is the mail archive of the 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]

Re: extra apache shared module DLLs

> What about modules that do change/patch Apache's source tree to hook on
> certain structures that can not be accessed using the "normal" API?
> I'm thinking espacially about mod_ssl and mod_snmp, which both need to
> patch Apache's core to be applied?

Well, you can run an mod_ssl-modified apache without having the mod_ssl
stuff "on".  (e.g. the .conf file doesn't load_module it).  I'd assume that
the same is true for mod_snmp.  So, I'd distribute the core apache package
with those modifications -- but without the modules (mod_ssl.dll)
themselves, and with the corresponding load_module statements commented out
of the .conf.

Then, the user could install the mod_ssl package, which would install the
module .dll and related stuff, have a postinstall script to generate some
dummy, self-signed server keys, and create an includable ssl-conf file.

It would still be up to the user to add "include mod_ssl.conf" and uncomment
the load_module statement in the main apache conf file.

Similar for mod_snmp.

Now, MOST modules don't require intrusive changes to the core apache.  So
most mod_ packages don't need this special treatment.  BUT, of those modules
that DO require it, which ones should you, Stipe, include pre-modified in
the main apache package?

The ones you as maintainer FEEL like including.  I gather that means mod_ssl
and mod_snmp, right now. :-)


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]