[rt-users] Recommendation on RT 3.4.1 Installation Packages?

[Carl Makin]

Hi Mike,

Mike Friedman wrote:

>o Is it true that I can go with Apache and FastCGI as an alternative to
>using mod_perl at all?
>  
>
Yes.

>o If so, which versions of Apache and FastCGI should I use? At the fastcgi
>download site, there is a mod_fastcgi-2.4.2 source distribution;  would
>this be OK?
>  
>
Yes this works fine and is what I use on my test system, but I would use 
the FreeBSD ports for Apache and Mod_Perl rather than using the raw source.

>o Is it true that I don't need mod_perl at all, especially if I go with
>Apache 2.x and FastCGI?  A confusing statement in the docs is this:
>
>  mod_perl 2.0 isn't quite ready for prime time just yet;
>  Best Practical Solutions strongly recommends that sites
>  use Apache 1.3 or FastCGI.
>  
>
I'm actually using Apache 2.0.50 and Mod_Perl 1.99r14 under FreeBSD 
4.10-STABLE on a dual CPU Dell box as our production system and it is 
working very well.

>For what it's worth, my initial environment will be FreeBSD 5.3-RELEASE
>and a current version of Postgres for the RT db.  Later, though, we may be
>moving to a Linux platform.
>  
>
I would recommend moving to a reasonably recent 5.3-STABLE or 
5.4-RELEASE when it comes out as it has a number of worthwhile improvements.

I'd also recommend satisfying as many of the perl dependancies via 
FreeBSD ports as you can rather than using the fixdeps makefile target 
as it makes upgrades (especially of perl) much easier later.

Carl.