Keep Server Online
If you find the Apache Lounge, the downloads and overall help useful, please express your satisfaction with a donation.
or
A donation makes a contribution towards the costs, the time and effort that's going in this site and building.
Thank You! Steffen
Your donations will help to keep this site alive and well, and continuing building binaries. Apache Lounge is not sponsored.
| |
|
 Topic: Apache Portable Runtime 1.3.0 Released |
|
| Author |
|
adonat
Joined: 03 Jun 2008
Posts: 18
|
 Posted: Fri 06 Jun '08 10:51 Post subject: Apache Portable Runtime 1.3.0 Released |
 |
|
I'm really new to apache but have been reading allot about security since that is always my first concern, with reliability and performance a close second. 
I am trying to put a package together for a website and was wondering how hard it would be to get a new build with this bug-fix release put in. I have done some compiling on VS 2005 but that was a long time ago and I was following very specific instructions to make it work without really knowing the ins and outs. If it is a big deal to do then never mind. But if it is a trivial change then would I be able to get an updated binary.
Of course programming is not really my thing but I have been leaning alot about web servers in general.
The version, I am using is... http://www.apachelounge.com/viewtopic.php?p=11008
I can't use the IPV6 one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
glsmith
Moderator
Joined: 16 Oct 2007
Posts: 2268
Location: Sun Diego, USA
|
| Posted: Fri 06 Jun '08 17:23 Post subject: |
|
|
I made sure it was not two minutes this time 
Wait a couple days and your dreams may come true. I expect to see the test tarballs of 2.2.9 tonight or tomorrow, I am not sure if they finally decided but I think APR 1.3 is going to ship with 2.2.9. |
|
| Back to top |
|
adonat
Joined: 03 Jun 2008
Posts: 18
|
| Posted: Fri 06 Jun '08 19:37 Post subject: |
|
|
I somehow deleted my post before I posted it. I think I need a fat finger keyboard. 
Anyways, thanks for the response. One more thing I thought I read somewhere is that some VS 2005 modules won't run properly on the VS 2008 build of Apache... or is it the other way around?
I was thinking about downloading VS 2008 Express edition and giving it a try when I have more free time. I can read directions pretty well so hopefully I won't screw anything up. Of course, anything I would build would never be on a production server... just for my own personal use. I don't trust my knowledge (lack of) to do it correctly.
This is the only website I found that does current / bug fix builds, so I can certainly appreciate the effort that goes in to keeping things up to date.
Thanks,
Aaron |
|
| Back to top |
|
Steffen
Moderator
Joined: 15 Oct 2005
Posts: 3056
Location: Hilversum, NL, EU
|
| Posted: Fri 06 Jun '08 20:06 Post subject: |
|
|
You can use a mix of modules build with VS2005/VC8 and/or VS2008/VC9, even they run on the Apache version from ASF (build with VC6)
Yes, it looks like 1.3 will be the APR in 2.2.9 - but I notice ASF left the possibility for changing their mind at the last minute if something really bad turns up.
Steffen |
|
| Back to top |
|
glsmith
Moderator
Joined: 16 Oct 2007
Posts: 2268
Location: Sun Diego, USA
|
| Posted: Fri 06 Jun '08 22:09 Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | 1st Law of Corporate Planning
Anything that can be changed, will be changed till there is no time left to change anything |
I think APR_HAVE_IPV6 should be turned back off on windows before that time since it is currently turned on in 1.3 branch. I do not think it is ready for prime time yet. The factors collide on one of my XP machines w/ the worthless IPv6 protocol installed. I think a check to see if it is actually possible before opening that socket (trapping error, deciding next course of action) would be a logical thing to do in windows. I believe Tom's patch does this or something close, No?
Happy Friday,
Gregg |
|
| Back to top |
|
tdonovan
Moderator
Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Posts: 611
Location: Milford, MA, USA
|
| Posted: Mon 09 Jun '08 13:55 Post subject: |
|
|
I agree that IPV6 isn't ready for prime time - especially on Windows.
Too many things are done using compiler directives which really need to be runtime checks. The three issues I am aware of are:IPV6 support should be determined for each network adapter, not decided at compile time.
With Windows, unlike Unix, it is very common to run Apache on a different machine than it was compiled on.
Whether the adapter supports IPV4 over an IPV6 socket, or if it needs separate sockets, needs to be decided at runtime.
In Vista this could be different for each network adapter in the same machine.
The size of the SOCKET_STORAGE symbol depends on which Windows SDK is used.
It is only big enough for IPV4 sockets with the 2003-R2 SDK, but big enough for IPV6 with the later (2008 and Vista) SDKs. I have given up for now trying to fix IPV6 on Windows. Since I don't have an IPV6 network to test it with, it is really just guesswork.
-tom- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
