SPDY in F18 (was Re: F17 httpd 2.4?)
dennisml at conversis.de
Thu Mar 29 02:45:52 UTC 2012
On 03/28/2012 07:39 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> 2012/3/28 Dennis Jacobfeuerborn <dennisml at conversis.de>:
>> On 03/27/2012 09:46 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>>> W dniu 21 marca 2012 15:13 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski
>>> <mkkp4x4 at gmail.com> napisał:
>>>> 2012/3/21 Peter Robinson <pbrobinson at gmail.com>:
>>>>> 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
>>> 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:
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.
More information about the devel