Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

handlers versus scripts, SSI difference

Expand Messages
  • gerard uolaquetalestem
    I began some weeks ago to think about translating my .pl scripts (that run with mod_perl 2 ::registry) to perl handlers. My first problem was to find how to
    Message 1 of 3 , Aug 4 1:05 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      I began some weeks ago to think about translating my .pl scripts (that run
      with mod_perl 2 ::registry) to perl handlers.
      My first problem was to find how to include a perl handler as i included my
      cgi scripts (include virtual).
      I found that #perl directive allows you to include with Apache::include the
      same registry scripts, but making it faster.
      I also note that in fact you could include any perl handler with that #perl
      directive.

      But it seems to be that with modperl as DSO this directive does not work,
      and that Apache::include is only a modperl1.x funcionality, so discarted in
      mod perl 2.

      I have had problems building modperl as a static module.
      Finally i could build as static module and as DSO module (mod_perl.a and
      mod_perl.so) but i didn't have modperl enabled without loadmodule
      mod_perl.so, so static version is not running.
      Windows binaries are all DSO, and i don't have VB to compile.

      And i've read that compiling mod_perl statically doesn't allow you to
      compile other DSO modules after.

      Then i think, if DSO is the comfortable way to do things (not in practical but
      in concept), how can i include a perl handler in my HTML page?

      I know there are modules like MASON or similar, and now i will enter to
      input and output filters, but comparing with the easiest way of Include
      virtual registry scripts i begin to think that perl handlers in mod perl lose
      here against cgi simple scripts.

      So this is my question. Are perlhandlers better than CGI registry scripts in
      speed but not in funcionality??? as i think CGI people uses to include their
      scripts a lot!!
      -----
      Un nuevo buscador m�s r�pido, eficaz y sencillo http://www.plaf.com
      Ya.com ADSL Home 24h, M�dem + Alta + 1 mes Gratis http://acceso.ya.com/adslhome24h/
    • Geoffrey Young
      ... I ve started this port, but it s a long way from being completed - it doesn t work right and dumps core, but I haven t looked at it in quite a while. oh,
      Message 2 of 3 , Aug 4 7:29 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        > But it seems to be that with modperl as DSO this directive does not work,
        > and that Apache::include is only a modperl1.x funcionality, so discarted in
        > mod perl 2.

        I've started this port, but it's a long way from being completed - it
        doesn't work right and dumps core, but I haven't looked at it in quite a
        while. oh, and it's really ugly too. in other words, very much a work in
        progress.

        here it is if you want to help - I'll probably get back to it in a few weeks.

        http://www.modperlcookbook.org/~geoff/modules/experimental/Apache-SSI-2.0.tar.gz

        --Geoff
      • Perrin Harkins
        ... I don t think this has anything to do with DSO vs. static. Apache::Include and Apache::SSI are the two ways of doing includes of mod_perl scripts in
        Message 3 of 3 , Aug 4 8:14 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          On Mon, 2003-08-04 at 04:05, gerard uolaquetalestem wrote:
          > But it seems to be that with modperl as DSO this directive does not work,
          > and that Apache::include is only a modperl1.x funcionality, so discarted in
          > mod perl 2.

          I don't think this has anything to do with DSO vs. static.
          Apache::Include and Apache::SSI are the two ways of doing includes of
          mod_perl scripts in mod_perl 1.x and they have not been ported to
          mod_perl 2 yet.

          If you are using apache 2, you should look at using the apache 2 version
          of mod_include, which can be used as a filter. Take a look at the
          documentation here:
          http://httpd.apache.org/docs-2.0/mod/mod_include.html

          > So this is my question. Are perlhandlers better than CGI registry scripts in
          > speed but not in funcionality???

          Perl handlers have better speed and functionality than CGI scripts
          running under Registry, but that has nothing to do with SSI.

          - Perrin
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.