From: Peter Foley (peter_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-20 05:58:53
> Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 20:38:24 +0100
> From: "Darren Garvey" <lists.drrngrvy_at_[hidden]>
> Subject: Re: [boost] [GSoC][cgi] Status update.
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> I have access to apache 1.3.*/2.* and lighttpd 1.4.*/1.5.* on windows,
> cygwin and linux, but I haven't been testing on all of them yet since
> are more fundamental things that need to be done first. :-(
Thats ok. I was just curious what servers you had tested on. No need
to apologise. Personally I would rather you implement the protocols
then spend time testing against servers! ;)
At the end of the day the end users (ie those interested in using the
library) will test and provide feedback on how well it works.
The main reason I was asking about support for IIS7, was it will be
easier for me to test against this configuration (I am planning on
setting up a virtual machine running server 2008 (I got a beta 3 disk at
> 2. Somewhat related to the above if the library code is
> > portable will the FASTCGI support you are building in only support
> > or will it also support TCP sockets? The reason I am asking is that
> > IIS7 will be providing support for the FASTCGI protocol (see
> > http://www.iis.net/default.aspx?tabid=1000051 for more info).
> Currently Boost.Asio doesn't support pipes, so this library won't
> either, so
> it uses TCP sockets. It's undecided whether, when pipe support comes
> the use of the two will be a run-time or compile-time choice. Over the
> summer the leaning has changed from run- to compile-time, but this is
At this point in time if I had to vote one way or another I would say I
would use TCP sockets. The main reason for this would be for
portability; Note: I am making the assumption that the support for pipes
would be *nix only.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk