On 03/28/2012 07:39 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
Hi,
2012/3/28 Dennis Jacobfeuerborn <dennisml(a)conversis.de>:
> On 03/27/2012 09:46 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>> W dniu 21 marca 2012 15:13 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski
>> <mkkp4x4(a)gmail.com> napisał:
>>> 2012/3/21 Peter Robinson <pbrobinson(a)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
>>
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