[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#627213: New virtual package(s) for different kinds of httpd (fastcgi etc)



Hi Jérémy,

Jérémy Lal wrote:

> Some clarifications :
> * setting up the fastcgi process itself is specific for each case,
>   so it's the responsibility of the "client" package to declare what it depends on
>   (php5-cgi, libfcgi-ruby, ...).
> * most, if not all, servers provide a way to spawn the fastcgi process within the
>   server, binding them to sockets and managing permissions, but httpd-fcgi should not mean that.
>   It should only mean the web server can talk to an existing fastcgi process.
>   The way to spawn it is specific to the "client" package (spawn-fcgi being a common tool
>   to achieve that task, but is only a possibility among others)

Could you clarify this further?

If I understand correctly, it is possible for a FastCGI application to
run on a different machine than the corresponding web server.  Does
this mean each webapp would be responsible for launching the FastCGI
application by some privately determined means and should use

	Recommends: httpd-fastcgi

to ensure people can view it?  Is there some standardized
configuration file a FastCGI app can use to launch only when needed,
if the admin wants that (socket activation through xinetd-workalikes,
I guess), or does the server have to be involved in that case?  And is
there some standardized configuration file a FastCGI app can use to
show up in the server, or does that require custom configuration?

I'm asking these things because gitweb can be used as a CGI or fastcgi
script but it was never packaged to set the latter up automatically.
Currently gitweb uses

	Depends: apache2 | httpd | lynx-cur
	Suggests: httpd-cgi | libcgi-fast-perl

documents setup as a CGI script at /usr/share/doc/git/README.Debian,
and puts a conffile for autoconfiguration at /etc/apache2/conf.d/gitweb.
It would be nice if these dependencies could be simplified and some
autoconfiguration magic added for people to use FastCGI just as easily
if they want it.



Reply to: