Re: [cgiwrap-users] real hosting and cgiwrap

[Marten L. <le...@va...>]

> Does mod_cgiwrap or suexec work on cern? netscape server? tinyhttpd?
> ncsa httpd? or any one of dozens of other http servers? No, of course
> not. 

Thats what I hate on very much open source projects: They try to be 
universal, no matter if anyone needs this features. My opinion is to be 
good in at least one point, not try to be little well in all possible 
points.

> Does cgiwrap? You bet it does. If the server supports the standard CGI
> spec, it will be 100% compatible with cgiwrap. I show approximately 40+
> different HTTP servers on freshmeat. At one time or another, and many
> still, cgiwrap has been used with most of the mainstream web servers,
> and some of the uncommon ones.

Fine. But my question wasn't if you can tell me how much different 
webservers exist, that someone started to code and that noone other than 
himself uses, but if mainstream providers (mass-hosting) with 
mainwebservers (apache) are using this. And they still don't do it.

> Yes, you can make cgiwrap apache-specific, and turn it into suexec, but
> I have no intention of making that the default. I personally don't see
> much point in using cgiwrap as suexec, but if I were doing it that way,
> I'd just use mod_rewrite. It's alot cleaner than most of the approaches
> that are being used. 

cgiwrap does more than suexec. Generally suexec would be ok, but it's 
howing bad performance, especially with mass-hosting, because it would 
require to set up a virtualhost-entry for each domain. Everything that 
most people are looking for is an apache-module, that replaces mod_exec 
by some module, that expands mod_exec in setting uid's.

You maybe will be astound, but I'm running apache with cgiwrap and 
mod_cgiwrap+mod_phpcgiwrap. I also coded some additional lines to handle 
our customized mass-hosting environment.

But after all I must say, that it took me several hours to got 
everything to work, because there is no easy-to-start README. Then it 
feels like cgiwrap shouldn't wear a 3.x release number.

Regards
Marten