Web server

[Joel Sherrill]

John Mills wrote:
> Lars, all -
>
> I have just finished integrating the GoAhead server with an eCos
> application and I went back over the RTEMS mailing lists when I read Lars'
> note. I didn't find any recent correspondence -- did anyone summarize
> 'Pros' and 'Cons' (as well as alternatives)?
>
>   
The main issue was that the GoAhead server appears to be no longer 
maintained
by its authors.  We have tolerated its licensing requirement for 
advertising since
we didn't have another alternative.

Start here: http://www.rtems.org/ml/rtems-users/2006/october/msg00088.html

Steven Johnson is across the world from us so I wouldn't expect a 
comment from
him for a few more hours.  I hoep he can update us on the status.  It 
seemed to
be in good shape the last I knew.
>> >From my viewpoint, I fought through GoAhead's the 'POST' upload in a
>>     
> couple of flavors and got it working both with GoAhead's embedded
> 'goforms' and conventional CGI, in Linux and eCos. I also found it useful
> to export the library and to link it to a thread in our app where I
> generate the web content.
>
> Finally, in response to the questions about a separate build of the
> compiled web content (using conventional HTML), notice that the
> precompiler 'webcomp' is a native tool of your development host. Even
> though you it '#include's many of the source package's headers, it can be
> build in the source tree and comes out as a self-contained command-line
> app that generates a *.c file which becomes part of your library source.
> Build 'webcomp' once and move it aside to use independently. See GoAhead's
> Makefile for usage of 'webcomp' and on linking the library. (A suitable
> target already exists.)
>
>   
The only technical gripes against GoAhead were that it seemed to be 
unmaintained and
that it does not compile warning free with late model gcc's.  The 
advertising clause
in the license is just another factor.

> That said, I would be interested in a discussion (or references to earlier 
> discussions) of concerns and alternative web-servers for RTEMS (and 
> similar) environments. One point I missed was the fate of the JAWS server 
> that I thought had once been a good choice for RTEMS use.
>
> Thanks.
>
>  - John Mills
>    john.m.mills at alum.mit.edu
>
> On Tue, 13 Feb 2007, Lars Törnkvist wrote:
>
>  
>   
>> Some time ago there was a short discussion about which web server to use
>> with RTEMS instead of the GoAhead one. shttpd was one example mentioned.
>> We are soon going to start working on web server functionality and are
>> interested in any information we can get about this.
>>     
>  
>   
>> Regards
>> Lars Törnkvist
>> Solid Software AB
>>     
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtems-users mailing list
> rtems-users at rtems.com
> http://rtems.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-users
>