Re: Apache / mod_perl / Perl under Windows

Michael Lackhoff wrote:
> Am 03.07.2015 um 15:55 schrieb André Warnier:
> 
>> Grateful for any insight.
> 
> No real insight but a working setup for development which runs from
> USB-stick and on about any system from XP 32bit to Windows 7 64bit
> (sorry, no experience with Windows server, all my servers run Linux,
> Windows is just nice for development):
> - httpd-2.2.29-win32-ssl_0.9.8.zip from apachelounge
> I cannot see exactly this version any longer on their site but I think
> it is a VC9 build so
> https://www.apachelounge.com/download/win32/binaries/httpd-2.2.29-win32-ssl_0.9.8-VC9.zip
> should be similar
> -
> http://strawberryperl.com/download/5.20.2.1/strawberry-perl-no64-5.20.2.1-32bit-portable.zip
> Important: use the "no USE_64_BIT_INT" version
> -
> http://people.apache.org/~stevehay/mod_perl-2.0.8-strawberryperl-5.20.1.1-32bit-no64.zip
> 
> This setup works quite well for me.
> 

Thank you for another combination which works.

What I am trying to figure out though, is what are the factors which make it so that this 
combination (and the one I mentioned before) work, as opposed to others which don't ?
There are 3 parts, each with the following variables :
   - the version of /that/ package (e.g. Apache httpd 2.2.x, or mod_perl 2.0.8)
   - the architecture : 32-bit or 64-bit
   - the compiler with which that package is compiled (VC 9, 10, 11 or gcc e.g.)

Which factors must match which, to have a chance of a working combination ?

I am quite sure that I tried together :
   - an Apache 2.2.x from ApacheLounge (compiled with VC)
   - Strawberry perl 5.18 32-bit
   - mod_perl 2.0.8 32-bit no 64 strawberry from Steve Hay
and that I could never get this to work under Windows 2008 (64-bit).
That's why I switched to activeperl 5.18 and mod_perl 2.0.8 for ActivePerl, but 
Strawberry-perl would have definitely been my preference, as it is what I usually 
recommend nowadays to my customers, for various reasons.
There are just a bit too many factor combinations possible, to figure this out easily by 
myself, so if someone has a clue as to what matters and what doesn't..

P.S.  In my defense, I was trying to figure this out at a customer, under some time 
pressure, by comparison between a working Linux Debian server (English), a working Windows 
2003 Server 32-bit (German), and a non-working Windows 2008 Server 64-bit (Dutch), each 
with its own variety of localised error messages, and each in a different geographical 
location, so it may be that at some point I lost my usual calm and rational investigative 
approach here..

Long live Linux Debian.