in reply to How common is mod_perl?

HTML::Mason 's capabilities but I understand from Mouse (2nd ed.) that it essentialy requires (not require) mod_perl

It is not true. Mason doesn't actually require mod_perl. It can run as CGI (however it will be very slow). Moreover I've been using it as standalone command line HTML generator.

See HTML::Mason FAQ. Here and here.

--
Ilya Martynov (http://martynov.org/)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: How common is mod_perl?
by PrakashK (Pilgrim) on Feb 14, 2002 at 20:42 UTC
    Mason doesn't actually require mod_perl. It can run as CGI (however it will be very slow).
    Does this mean, mod_perl only provides Mason the persistent CGI process capability? Or, are any other capabilities of mod_perl taken advantage of by Mason?

    Put in another way, if the persistence of CGI processes is provided by in a non-mod_perl way (example, FastCGI or SpeedyCGI), does Mason work as effectively as in a mod_perl environment?

    Thanks,
    /prakash

[reply]
      Does this mean, mod_perl only provides Mason the persistent CGI process capability? Or, are any other capabilities of mod_perl taken advantage of by Mason?

      That's right. Mason mostly needs mod_perl for persistence. However there are some sweeties only avialable if you use Mason under mod_perl. Like simple configuration via apache config files and access to Apache API.

      Put in another way, if the persistence of CGI processes is provided by in a non-mod_perl way (example, FastCGI or SpeedyCGI)

      I heard about people who use Mason this way. You can find some info about it in mason maillist archives.

      --
      Ilya Martynov (http://martynov.org/)

[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom