Linux - ServerThis forum is for the discussion of Linux Software used in a server related context.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Wondering what the new standard is for Apache Web servers. Should one install apache or apache2? My current Debian Etch server is using Apache, only because I wasn't sure about Apache2 and more familiar with Apache. Familiar with Apache under Debian that is.
For SSL is use Apache-SSL. I see now Apache2 pacakge unless SSL is built in under Apache2. Correct me if I am not understanding that correctly.
I think the general consensus is that you should use whichever one works best for you. There are three currently "supported" apache versions: 1.3.x, 2.0.x and 2.2.x. Each of the later versions has increasingly more features and capabilities, but if apache 1.3.x is what you're used to and you don't need the new stuff... stick with what you know. I personally prefer 2.0.x but have been moving many of my customers' sites to 2.2.x just to keep them on the bleeding edge (because they like it that way). All 3 of these "supported" versions does get security patches on a regular basis, so there should be nothing to worry about there. There is something to be said for using the default that ships with your distribution, though. For the less-geeky out there (and really... all of us), it's certainly easier to use the default update/patch managers for your distro than to patch everything by hand.
Basically, it's up to you. If you don't mind learning the new stuff, get the latest release of your preferred distro and use what they support. If you would rather stick to what is familiar, you can definitely use 1.3.x without worrying too much about being outdated or full of security holes.
oh, and about the SSL packages, apache2 does have the ability to utilize SSL by default, assuming that you have the requisite supporting packages like openssl. Rather than make the user install a separate package for apache ssl, it now ships with the base package and you simply turn it on.
Apache 2 has threads amongst some other things, but threads is the main reason to upgrade or not to upgrade.
Most webservers don't just serve static content, so there is normally some programming language associated and often it is module'd into apache. These are/were the things hit with the change from fork to thread, most are resolved now though, but if you are running old software in the mods making the change could be painful.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.