APR, libapreq2, mod_perl2, APR::*, Apache2::*

Trying to locate APR::Request::Apache2 on my system, I noticed it is
part of libapreq2.

libapreq 2-2.07 | ModPerl | ModPerl
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/modperl/modperl/87199

| libapreq2 is an APR-based shared library used for parsing HTTP
| cookies, query-strings and POST data.

Doing further reading unearthes new ranges of modules, which has me
somewhat confused.

libapreq2 has modules like the following:

* APR::Request
* APR::Request::Cookie

It is said to be closer to the bare metal.

libapreq2 also has modules like the following:

* Apache2::Request
* Apache2::Cookie
* Apache2::Upload

It is said this is to mimic the 1.x API.

Without libapreq2, I already have:

* Apache2::RequestRec
* Apache2::RequestIO
* Apache2::RequestUtil

It is said this is to only load what's needed.

I'd like to reach an understanding of what these ranges of modules and
interfaces are intended for. When would I want to use which interface?
Or is it all a matter of style and taste?

Michael Ludwig

Re: APR, libapreq2, mod_perl2, APR::*, Apache2::*

Michael Ludwig wrote:
> I'd like to reach an understanding of what these ranges of modules and
> interfaces are intended for. When would I want to use which interface?
> Or is it all a matter of style and taste?

Possibly. You will need the standard modperl2 library to even get
modperl up and running. I would recommend installing libapreq2 as well,
as it exposes more functionalities that you will very likely use
(especially if you're used to CGI).

Re: APR, libapreq2, mod_perl2, APR::*, Apache2::*

Foo JH schrieb:
> Michael Ludwig wrote:
>> I'd like to reach an understanding of what these ranges of modules
>> and interfaces are intended for. When would I want to use which
>> interface? Or is it all a matter of style and taste?
>
> Possibly. You will need the standard modperl2 library to even get
> modperl up and running. I would recommend installing libapreq2 as
> well, as it exposes more functionalities that you will very likely use
> (especially if you're used to CGI).

Or mod_perl 1.0, for that matter. Thanks for your answer, it clarifies
things a bit for me, as does this thread:

How to extract name/value pairs from the query string? | ModPerl
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/modperl/modperl/98100

Turns out either the CGI module or libapreq2 is necessary for parsing
the query string. I was expecting that functionality in one of
Apache2::RequestRec, or Apache2::RequestUtil, or maybe just Apache2
(which doesn't exist).

It is said in the thread referred to above that "the splitting of the
APIs [...] is strange and confusing", and coming from mod_perl 1.0, I
agree. But it probably has advantages as well.

Michael Ludwig

Re: APR, libapreq2, mod_perl2, APR::*, Apache2::*

Michael Ludwig wrote:
>
> It is said in the thread referred to above that "the splitting of the
> APIs [...] is strange and confusing", and coming from mod_perl 1.0, I
> agree. But it probably has advantages as well.

i think that comment about splitting the api was with respect to
RequestRec, RequestUtil, RequestIO, not really to do with
Apache2::Request. Apache::Request for mp1 is a part of libapreq, just
as Apache2::Request is part of libapreq2. Maybe you realized that and
i'm just misunderstanding though.

Personally, i think libapreq should be part of core httpd (or at least a
'normal' module, and libapreq2's perl bindings should be part of stock
mod_perl.

Adam

Re: APR, libapreq2, mod_perl2, APR::*, Apache2::*

Adam Prime wrote:
> Personally, i think libapreq should be part of core httpd (or at least a
> 'normal' module, and libapreq2's perl bindings should be part of stock
> mod_perl.
Oh, but we started work for this in 2.4 of httpd for libapreq.so and
mod_apreq.so for http core.

after httpd 2.6/3.0 we might be able to swing the perl bindings peices.

See:
Subject: Food for thought / looking for something to do

thead on dev@perl.a.o from ~11/10/08



--
------------------------------------------------------------ ------------
1024D/DB9B8C1C B90B FBC3 A3A1 C71A 8E70 3F8C 75B8 8FFB DB9B 8C1C
Philip M. Gollucci (pgollucci@p6m7g8.com) c: 703.336.9354
Consultant - P6M7G8 Inc. http://p6m7g8.net
Senior Sys Admin - RideCharge, Inc. http://ridecharge.com
Contractor - PositiveEnergyUSA http://positiveenergyusa.com
ASF Member - Apache Software Foundation http://apache.org
FreeBSD Committer - FreeBSD Foundation http://freebsd.org

Work like you don't need the money,
love like you'll never get hurt,
and dance like nobody's watching.

Re: APR, libapreq2, mod_perl2, APR::*, Apache2::*

Adam Prime schrieb:
> Michael Ludwig wrote:
>>
>> It is said in the thread referred to above that "the splitting of the
>> APIs [...] is strange and confusing", and coming from mod_perl 1.0, I
>> agree. But it probably has advantages as well.
>
> i think that comment about splitting the api was with respect
> to RequestRec, RequestUtil, RequestIO, not really to do with
> Apache2::Request.

I guess you're right.

> Apache::Request for mp1 is a part of libapreq, just as
> Apache2::Request is part of libapreq2. Maybe you realized
> that and i'm just misunderstanding though.

I didn't - thanks for pointing this out. I wasn't aware any more, and
maybe have never been, that Apache::Request was part of libapreq.

Michael Ludwig

Re: APR, libapreq2, mod_perl2, APR::*, Apache2::*

Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
> Oh, but we started work for this in 2.4 of httpd for libapreq.so and
> mod_apreq.so for http core.

cool

> after httpd 2.6/3.0 we might be able to swing the perl bindings peices.

So where does that leave the perl binding between 2.4 and 3.0? Or will
we all be running mod_parrot/mod_perl6 by then (which looks like it's
made great progress since YAPC)

Adam

Re: APR, libapreq2, mod_perl2, APR::*, Apache2::*

Adam Prime wrote:
> Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
>> Oh, but we started work for this in 2.4 of httpd for libapreq.so and
>> mod_apreq.so for http core.
>
> cool
>
>> after httpd 2.6/3.0 we might be able to swing the perl bindings peices.
>
> So where does that leave the perl binding between 2.4 and 3.0? Or will
> we all be running mod_parrot/mod_perl6 by then (which looks like it's
> made great progress since YAPC)
>
> Adam
Its quite complex and I'm not sure API/ABI and all that
and combinations of module A.

Given apr, apr-util, httpd (2.0.x,2.2.x, mpms) perl (5.6.x, 5.8.x, 5.10.x)
mod_perl 2.0.4 and libapreq2.08 we support well over 2k combinations.
I'm not sure I want to fork libapreq2 and have even more.

We really need more people then me following dev@httpd.a.o


--
------------------------------------------------------------ ------------
1024D/DB9B8C1C B90B FBC3 A3A1 C71A 8E70 3F8C 75B8 8FFB DB9B 8C1C
Philip M. Gollucci (pgollucci@p6m7g8.com) c: 703.336.9354
Consultant - P6M7G8 Inc. http://p6m7g8.net
Senior Sys Admin - RideCharge, Inc. http://ridecharge.com
Contractor - PositiveEnergyUSA http://positiveenergyusa.com
ASF Member - Apache Software Foundation http://apache.org
FreeBSD Committer - FreeBSD Foundation http://freebsd.org

Work like you don't need the money,
love like you'll never get hurt,
and dance like nobody's watching.

Re: APR, libapreq2, mod_perl2, APR::*, Apache2::*

On Thu, 8 Jan 2009, Adam Prime wrote:
> Personally, i think libapreq should be part of core httpd
> (or at least a 'normal' module, and libapreq2's perl
> bindings should be part of stock mod_perl.

Yeah I've run into systems multiple times where the boss was
too afraid of change to allow building libapreq2... like on
CentOS, where the perl bindings to APR don't appear to be
available and have to be built, which requires the dev
packages... and the dev packages require a server upgrade
which isn't allowed because (fear of the unknown) it might
cause problems with existing applications. :-/ It would be
awesome if the libapreq2 modules installed with mod_perl2,
since they are so useful to applications, and it's tiring to
explain these things and useless to say that the chosen OS
flavor is lame.

> So where does that leave the perl binding between 2.4 and
> 3.0? Or will we all be running mod_parrot/mod_perl6 by
> then (which looks like it's made great progress since
> YAPC)

Great, all code where '.' was the concatenator operator
breaks, hurray. (?)

Mark

Re: APR, libapreq2, mod_perl2, APR::*, Apache2::*

Mark Hedges wrote:
>> So where does that leave the perl binding between 2.4 and
>> 3.0? Or will we all be running mod_parrot/mod_perl6 by
>> then (which looks like it's made great progress since
>> YAPC)
>
> Great, all code where '.' was the concatenator operator
> breaks, hurray. (?)

You don't have to switch if you don't want to, it's not like mod_perl
(or perl 5) is going to disappear from production anytime soon. I'm
just glad that someone (Jeff Horwitz) is actually already working on it,
because to me, perl6 without a mod_perl6 is close to useless.

I'm also hopeful that the eventual migration might be as simple as the
oft dreaded migration from mp1, mp2 (ie not all that hard). Only time
will tell.

Adam