logo
Apache Lounge
Webmasters

 


About

Forum Index Downloads Search Register Log in  RSS Apache Lounge
 



Keep Server Online

If you find the Apache Lounge, the downloads and overall help useful, please express your satisfaction with a donation.

or

Bitcoin

A donation makes a contribution towards the costs, the time and effort that's going in this site and building.

Thank You! Steffen

Apache Lounge is not sponsored.

Your donations will help to keep this site alive and well, and continuing building binaries.



httpd releases

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Apache Forum Index -> News & Hangout



View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
James Blond
Moderator


Joined: 19 Jan 2006
Posts: 6255
Location: Germany, Next to Hamburg

PostPosted: Thu 03 Aug '06 10:26    Post subject: httpd releases Reply with quote

I'm a bit confused. ASF released Apache 2.2.3 as stable, also 2.0.59 as bugfix release and 1.3.37 as bugfix release. So they are on three project at the time. Why do they still support 1.3.x version? It is very old. Finishing the support for 1.3.x would force the hosters to upgrade to 2.0.x which one is not the newest. Shouldn't they use the 2.2.x ?
Back to top
Jorge



Joined: 12 Mar 2006
Posts: 376
Location: Belgium

PostPosted: Thu 03 Aug '06 10:35    Post subject: Re: httpd releases Reply with quote

James Blond wrote:
I'm a bit confused. ASF released Apache 2.2.3 as stable, also 2.0.59 as bugfix release and 1.3.37 as bugfix release. So they are on three project at the time. Why do they still support 1.3.x version? It is very old. Finishing the support for 1.3.x would force the hosters to upgrade to 2.0.x which one is not the newest. Shouldn't they use the 2.2.x ?


1.3 has a lot of modules for it that are still used, wich aren't updated to the newerversion. IMHO 1.3 should got a pile of software where DOS, NT 4, WIN98... is at.

2.0 is a nice clean release nothing new is added so should be apailing to host providers who don't want to update there server every few month but say maybe one per year.

2.2 is the new dog in town... I love it *hugs* everyone should use it IMO its stable, it seems faster (on windows) and it has tons of useful stuff
Back to top
Steffen
Moderator


Joined: 15 Oct 2005
Posts: 2581
Location: Hilversum, NL, EU

PostPosted: Thu 03 Aug '06 12:26    Post subject: Reply with quote

The ASF strongly encourage all users to migrate to Apache 2.2, as only limited maintenance is performed on these legacy versions. They will likely fix only security flaws as they come up.


Steffen
Back to top
HobbyTech



Joined: 25 Jun 2006
Posts: 31
Location: USA

PostPosted: Tue 29 Aug '06 22:20    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, one reason could also be that you need 3rd-party dlls, like Steffans, to get the whole thing to work right.

It would be nice if everything would work "out of the box" for home/testing users on a Windows system...but then it would be difficult to improve the functionality and security of WAMP.

Apache on Windows is always a little behind, but the newest releases bring it a lot closer. Unfortunately, for some people, it's maybe still too much effort?

I'm happy now that I figured out I really didn't have SP2 (I assumed the school's distribution of Windows was up-to-date, but it wasn't)...I can test now on Windows. And I still have today and tomorrow off from both work and school, while between semesters, to test...yay!
Back to top
Jorge



Joined: 12 Mar 2006
Posts: 376
Location: Belgium

PostPosted: Wed 30 Aug '06 10:20    Post subject: Reply with quote

HobbyTech wrote:
Well, one reason could also be that you need 3rd-party dlls, like Steffans, to get the whole thing to work right.

It would be nice if everything would work "out of the box" for home/testing users on a Windows system...but then it would be difficult to improve the functionality and security of WAMP.

Apache on Windows is always a little behind, but the newest releases bring it a lot closer. Unfortunately, for some people, it's maybe still too much effort?

I'm happy now that I figured out I really didn't have SP2 (I assumed the school's distribution of Windows was up-to-date, but it wasn't)...I can test now on Windows. And I still have today and tomorrow off from both work and school, while between semesters, to test...yay!


Actually you don't need 3rd party dll's,
You can compile it via MSCV6 the runtime comes with windows XP so no need to install althouygh the MSVC80 runtime does seem to give better code
Back to top
HobbyTech



Joined: 25 Jun 2006
Posts: 31
Location: USA

PostPosted: Thu 31 Aug '06 8:54    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jorge wrote:
Actually you don't need 3rd party dll's,
You can compile it via MSCV6 the runtime comes with windows XP so no need to install althouygh the MSVC80 runtime does seem to give better code
I meant in comparison to downloding the pre-built Apache .msi file for Windows x86 from ASF, then seperately downloading everything else...

...The 2.2.x series of Apache has a problem where Windows can't find the service even if you use the correct service name. Steffan's DLL solved that.
Back to top


Post new topic   Reply to topic    Apache Forum Index -> News & Hangout
Page 1 of 1