wine users - Apr 2009 - Is it possible to install and successfully run httpd-2.2.11?

I have tried this many times in the past. But I've never been fully
successful on running httpd on Linux using Wine. I would just like to know if
it's possible, and how to go about it. It seems like it should be a
straightforward process.

Xavian-Anderson Macpherson
Shingoshi

On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 2:58 AM, Shingoshi <wineforum-user at winehq.org>
wrote:
> I have tried this many times in the past. But I've never been fully
successful on running httpd on Linux using Wine. I would just like to know if
it's possible, and how to go about it. It seems like it should be a
straightforward process.
Why would you want to do that? Just use native apache.

-- 
-Austin

austin987 wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 2:58 AM, Shingoshi <wineforum-user at
winehq.org> wrote:
> 
> > I have tried this many times in the past. But I've never been
fully successful on running httpd on Linux using Wine. I would just like to know
if it's possible, and how to go about it. It seems like it should be a
straightforward process.
> > 
> 
> Why would you want to do that? Just use native apache.
> 
> -- 
> -Austin

FOR PURPOSES OF COMPARISON!
And I don't need my reasons questioned.
Neither was I seeking permission.

The configuration of apache is up to the user. This includes the port number to
which it is attached.

As for my being confrontational. I asked how it could be done. I didn't ask
whether or not it should be done. So the simple solution here, was that if you
didn't know how to complete what I was asking for, there was no need for you
to answer. There is software that I my need to check the operation of when using
apache. There are may packages typically used exclusively for windows, which I
attempt to test in the Wine environment. I customarily run copies of all the
Mozilla packages in Wine for comparison. This is required to verify the function
of many extensions.

So I was only looking for responses from those who engage in actual development.
So please refrain from any further postings, unless you can specifically answer
the question. And based on the issues that you've raised, it's apparent
you're not qualified to do so.

Shingoshi

Would you have appreciated having your right to ask a question to be questioned?
How was your original answer intended to help may particular situation? Does
anyone really have to explain why they want to do something, when all
they've asked is, "Can this be done? Whether you want to admit it or
not, YOU started out being confrontational, by asking me to justify my right to
ask the question.

You started out with the admission that you couldn't see any reason to do
this. Let me remind you, I didn't ask whether you or anyone else thought it
should or would be reasonable. Your's is a common attitude that discourages
many Linux users from asking questions. It's as though the questioner has to
get permission to ask a question. That's nonsense. So the best course of
action is simple. If you're not answering the user's question (as
stated!), don't respond.

I posted the errors messages. Did you make an effort to explain what those
messages are, or why they would occur. No, you didn't. What you did, was to
dismiss the question. 
> Why would you want to do that? Just use native apache.
 That isn't as much of a question, as much as it is a comment. And the
comment was only meant to dismiss the validity of my question. It is an
expression that if you can't see a reason, none exists. That's not
productive.

Have you installed Apache on Wine yourself? Did you even try to do so? So let me
make this easy for you. Here's the link for the version of Apache in
question:
>
http://www.gtlib.gatech.edu/pub/apache/httpd/binaries/win32/apache_2.2.11-win32-x86-openssl-0.9.8i.msi
I started by stating that I can't even get Httpd installed. If you don't
see the same error messages, then say so. So look and see if you can even
install it. What am I supposed to be responsible for regarding development, when
I can't even get the executable installed. I deliberately listed the error
messages to find out what's stopping Apache from completely installing.

If you knew that the configuration of Apache is up to the user, why would you
list that as a reason not to try, or a cause of concern. I wasn't asking for
help in the configuration of Apache. I was asking if it could even be installed.
There's no point in talking about running Apache, if you can't even
install it.

As far as what developers test, it seems that the most likely applications to be
tested, are the ones that are already opensource. If there are applications
currently used by Windows users, especially in business environments, it seems
to make sense to test those applications with Wine. My concern has been to move
businesses over to using Wine for those applications which may have no
equivalents in Linux.

The point is to determine the level of confidence that new business users can
have about using Wine in Linux for Windows applications. So I'm sorry for
being so blunt or confrontational. But I'm simply tired of having my right
to ask questions, questioned. I don't do the things most users typically do.
So most of my questions don't conform to the norm. I shouldn't have to
explain or justify why I ask a question, when the question is as simple as,
"can this be done?

If it is possible to prove to Windows users, that they can run business
applications, more of those users will feel comfortable switching to Linux. My
interest is not with the typical desktop applications. I'm interested in
those applications which are available on Sourceforge meant to run on Windows.
there are a number of repositories for opensource applications for Windows. I
typically test whether those applications can be installed, and whether they
would perform as the user would expect them to.

So while you may not see anything from me here on this site, that doesn't
mean I'm not engaged. I simply posted this question, because it may be a
show stopper for further work.

Shingoshi

Gert van den Berg wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 04:15, James McKenzie wrote:
> 
> > Most of us run
> > Apache and Apache-Tomcat, not httpd as it has a much smaller base and
> > Apache is known to work with Wine.
> > 
> > 
> Appache-httpd is what is commonly know as Apache
> 
> @Shingoshi
> 
> As for the problem, try finding an installer free version of it and
> try running it. (XAMPP is quite nice and includes a MySQL / PHP, etc)
> You might want to file a bug for the installer anyway...
> 
> Post terminal output if it does not run. (Remember to change the port
> if not running as root)
> 
> Read the FAQ if you do not know how to do any of the above.
> 
> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html might be useful as
well...
> 
> About suggesting the native httpd version, users tend to as questions
> related to a solution they have in mind for a problem, rather than for
> the actual problem. Suggesting K3b / something similar usually work
> better than explaining to someone how to get Nero to run under Wine,
> if all the user want to accomplish is to write a CD. If you stated
> that the linux version would not work for your purposes, you would
> have gotten an answer easier.
> 
> Gert

This is an answer I truly appreciate!

There are likely going to be situations where I really need to know why
something doesn't work. I have Httpd-2.2.11 installed and running under
Linux. But sometimes, I just like to see how some things compare. I have tried
suggesting to some of my doctors (who know of my Linux usage) the possibility of
running Linux and it's applications, instead of Windows. To that end, I
started searching for as many opensource medical applications as I could find.
Now some of those doctors have offices which use distributed networks. In fact
that is pretty much the norm now for all but the smallest offices. I'm not
certain to what degree Apache/Httpd is used in those environments. And since I
have NO Windows computers operating, I have no way of checking many of the
packages that I would be inclined to suggest the use of.

It is from this perspective that I use Wine. I don't play games. So I have
absolutely no interest there. And I do understand that many if not most of the
Wine userbase uses Wine for nonprofessional applications. That's fine. But
we need to be careful to understand that Linux is primarily a server system, on
top of which various desktop solutions have been provided.

I am almost exclusively involved with server applications. So I'm sorry that
I felt the need to respond as I did, having to justify why I would want to do
something that many who use Linux (as nothing more than a free alternative to
Windows) wouldn't understand.

However, your answer was more to the point of my question, and therefore can
only be met with respect.

Thank You!
Xavian-Anderson Macpherson
Shingoshi

austin987 wrote:
> Like I said, it installed fine for me in git, so you might upgrade
> wine if you're using an old version...
> 
> --
> -Austin

Thank you! I'm sorry I missed your earlier answer. I'm using the latest
development version of Wine (1.1.20-i486-1ms.tgz). So I'm not sure what else
could be done. Gert's answer might work though. But part of the problem is
that I'm suggesting Linux to be used by people who have no experience with
it. So asking them to attempt commandline installs with packages that don't
have installers, is pretty much impractical.

Shingoshi

I didn't understand that you meant the git version of Wine. I thought you
meant there was a git version of Httpd.

I'm wondering if I need to simply delete my earlier version of Httpd's
directory, and attempt to install it again. But I'm not sure about the
registry, and how it would be affected by that.

Shingoshi