building apache and using apxs

[Kipper]

What is the preferred way of building apache from the binary? Is it
a) ./install-bindist.sh
or
b) ./configure make make install?

I noticed that using b) does not install mod_so.

Either way, when I run /usr/local/apache/bin/httpd -l, the bottom line is
suexec: disabled; invalid wrapper bin/suexec.
Is this a problem?

This leads to my second problem. I'm trying to install mod_random, but running
/usr/local/apache/bin/apxs -c -i -a -n random random.c results in
bash: /usr/local/apache/bin/apxs: bad interpreter: No such file of directory.

When I run make I get
apxs -c mod_random.c
make: apxs:command not found
make: ** [mod_random.so] Error127

Can anyone help? It's important to think. It's what separates us from lentils.

 

[ifincham]

Hi,

The script install.bindist.sh is for installing a pre-compiled 'binary' distribution.

From the unpacked source code directory, you can do the following to compile DSO support and most of the common modules :

# ./configure --enable-module=most --enable-shared=max
# make
# make install

(do './configure --help' for all options)

See -->

http://httpd.apache.org/docs/install.html

apxs is a perl script that is included in the source code tarball - e.g. for 1.3.23 (

http://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/apache_1.3.23.tar.gz)

as apache_1.3.23\src\support\axps.pl .

Hope this helps

 

[Kipper]

Thanks, the bottom line being it's best to use the source code rather than the binary? It's important to think. It's what separates us from lentils.

 

[ifincham]

Hi,

It all depends what you want to do really - e.g. do you want to use apache 2.0 when you can't yet get rpms ?. In general, I'd normally use rpms because that helps a lot with the dependencies and installing / uninstalling fairly cleanly. Plus, for redhat (and probably most others), you get sysv init scripts so that its very easy to start at different runlevels.

If you're not going to use rpms, then I generally would compile rather than just unpack a tar.gz file, mainly for optimisation / customisation purposes. However, the problem is maybe indavertently leaving things out, etc., and aslo needing to learn what to do.

Regards

 

[Kipper]

I generally stay away from RPMs because I seem to be plagued with dependency problems.

Thinking back, I compiled apache a while back and then had no problems with installing 3rd-party modules.

I'll give the RPM a go and if that fails, go back to compiling the source. I'm not a developer who needs the bleeding-edge release, the stable one is just fine for my requirements. Perhaps there are some bugs in the binaries that apache need to sort out?

Thanks for your advice. It's important to think. It's what separates us from lentils.

 

[Kipper]

PS
I've just compiled and made the source code and installed the module faultlessly. It's important to think. It's what separates us from lentils.