Re: Why doesn't Apache/Stronghold like Linux 2.0.x?

Jon Lewis (jlewis@inorganic5.fdt.net)
Sat, 21 Dec 1996 03:22:50 -0500 (EST)


On Fri, 20 Dec 1996, David N. Cicalo wrote:

> > You can try kernel 2.0.28 when it comes out.
> > It should be "more stable" than 2.0.27 :)
>
> As suggested by another user, removing the STATS and INFO modules in
> Apache/ Stringhold has solved the problem without making any other
> changes. It's a simple modification in the the Makefile and a
> recompile.

I think you'll find that wasn't the problem. I'd been running without
those modules and was seeing Apache 1.1.1 cease to fork and answer
requests. I recently added both those modules so I can sort of keep an
eye on the status. I've heard we should upgrade to 1.2b2 or that we
should do that _and_ define BROKEN_WAIT. I'm not sure what if either will
solve the problem. BROKEN_WAIT looks like it adds some sanity checking to
make sure server slots don't "vanish".

------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Lewis <jlewis@fdt.net> | Unsolicited commercial e-mail will
Network Administrator | be proof-read for $199/hr.
________Finger jlewis@inorganic5.fdt.net for PGP public key_______