Keep Server Online
If you find the Apache Lounge, the downloads and overall help useful, please express your satisfaction with a donation.
or
A donation makes a contribution towards the costs, the time and effort that's going in this site and building.
Thank You! Steffen
Your donations will help to keep this site alive and well, and continuing building binaries. Apache Lounge is not sponsored.
| |
|
 Topic: mod_wl_22.so with Apache 2.4 |
|
| Author |
|
rinser
Joined: 08 Mar 2012
Posts: 2
Location: London
|
 Posted: Thu 08 Mar '12 17:10 Post subject: mod_wl_22.so with Apache 2.4 |
 |
|
Hello
I have just upgraded Apache http server from 2.22 to 2.4. It has configured ok and the usual test returns "It works".
The Apache server is used to forward calls to our OBIEE installation and for this we use a module plugin, the mod_wl_22.so which we extract from our weblogic installation on the internal server.
This has worked fine on Apache 2.2.21 / 22.
It doesn't work on 2.4.
Starting Apache presents the following error:
| Quote: |
httpd: Syntax error on line 489 of /mnt/Apache/conf/httpd.conf: Cannot load /mnt/Apache/modules/mod_wl_22.so into server: /mnt/Apache/modules/mod_wl_22.so: undefined symbol: ap_log_rerror |
when I try ldd I get this
| Quote: | ldd -d /mnt/Apache/modules/mod_wl_22.so
libstdc++.so.5 => /usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.5 (0x00002ac1291c0000)
libm.so.6 => /lib64/libm.so.6 (0x00002ac12949b000)
libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x00002ac12971e000)
libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x00002ac12992d000)
/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00002ac128fa3000)
undefined symbol: apr_pool_cleanup_null (/mnt/Apache/modules/mod_wl_22.so) |
From the documentation of 2.4:
| Quote: | | Many third-party modules designed for version 2.2 will otherwise work unchanged with the Apache HTTP Server version 2.4. Some will require changes; see the API update overview. |
The API section does not cover this particular module.
As this release (2.4) has just been released, I am not sure how to verify if this module is ok with 2.4.
Has anyone had the same issue with mod_wl_22.so on this version of Apache?
If I cant find a resolution I will have to fail back to 2.2.22 - not ideal as we are supposed to be using the latest and greatest Apache in terms of security for this externally facing box.
httpd.conf configured the same way (maybe this is where I am going wrong) as for 2.2.22:
| Code: | LoadModule weblogic_module modules/mod_wl_22.so
# This empty block is needed to save mod_wl related configuration from EM to this file when changes are made at the Base Virtual Host Level
<IfModule weblogic_module>
SetHandler weblogic-handler
DebugConfigInfo OFF
Debug OFF
# WLLogFile /tmp/weblogic.log
# MatchExpression *.jsp
WebLogicHost *******.**.co.uk
DynamicServerList Off
WebLogicPort 9704
</IfModule>
|
Versions used:
OBIEE Oracle Business Intelligence 11.1.1.5:
Linux x86 (64-bit)
11.2.0.2.0 database
Apache 2.4 |
|
| Back to top |
|
tdonovan
Moderator
Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Posts: 611
Location: Milford, MA, USA
|
| Posted: Thu 08 Mar '12 22:59 Post subject: |
|
|
This quote is not very clear about what is needed for Apache 2.4: | Quote: | | Many third-party modules designed for version 2.2 will otherwise work unchanged with the Apache HTTP Server version 2.4 |
.
This only means that it might not be necessary to change the source code for your module. It doesn't mean that you can use your existing 2.2 binary modules (i.e. use your mod_*.so files) with Apache version 2.4. It is always necessary to re-compile the source code and create a new binary module for Apache 2.4.
It looks like Oracle (Weblogic) Plugins does not give you the source code for mod_wl_22 (or mod_wl128_22), so you may either need to:wait for Oracle to supply Apache 2.4 versions of these binary modules
-or-
ask Oracle for the module source code - so you can compile it yourself with Apache 2.4, and check if this is a module which doesn't need source code changes for 2.4. -tom- |
|
| Back to top |
|
rinser
Joined: 08 Mar 2012
Posts: 2
Location: London
|
| Posted: Fri 09 Mar '12 14:14 Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for the response Tom.
I have raised an SR and will update this post if I get anything useful back from Oracle.
Regards,
update from SR:
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
