On 03/28/2012 07:39 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote: > Hi, > > 2012/3/28 Dennis Jacobfeuerborn <dennisml@xxxxxxxxxxxx>: >> On 03/27/2012 09:46 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote: >>> W dniu 21 marca 2012 15:13 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski >>> <mkkp4x4@xxxxxxxxx> napisał: >>>> 2012/3/21 Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx>: >>> [..] >>>>> There's nothing stopping you from packaging up mod_spdy or any other >>>>> modules that add support for the protocol. >>>> >>>> I will try tomorrow - I've got mod_fcgid package sources for reference. >>>> >>>> Who can mod_spdy if I make the spec file for this? >>> >>> I wanted to write "Who can adopt mod_spdy" :) >>> >>> I created a feature page >>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/F18SPDY >>> >>> If someone accidentally did not know what SPDY is - there is a link to >>> interesting video from GoogleTechTalks on this page. >>> >>> I also created an initial version of spec file for mod_spdy that can >>> be found at this repo https://github.com/eventhorizonpl/mod_spdy >>> >> >> That mod_ssl_with_npn.so hack looks pretty dodgy to me. Does that even >> work? Have you tested this together with the regular mod_ssl that comes >> with the httpd package? > > I've got some problems with getting it to work. > >> I cannot see how both modules can coexist. > > I think that it is not possible. > As far as I can tell the patch required to mod_ssl is fairly simple and it looks like it will be committed to upstream soon: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52210 You could ask the maintainer of the httpd package what he thinks about adding this patch to the package so the modified mod_ssl is no longer required. Regards, Dennis -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
