asp.net mvc - What is the difference between setting up mod-mono virtual hosts via webapp file versus apache site configuration? -
i'm using mod-mono deploying asp.net mvc application on ubuntu server 10.04. following packages installed: mono-apache-server4 libapache2-mod-mono apache2
.
there several blogs configure mod-mono virtual hosts via sites-available apache configuration. example, modify /etc/apache2/sites-available/default
configuration this:
<virtualhost *:80> serveradmin webmaster@localhost monoapplications "/:/var/www" monoserverpath /usr/bin/mod-mono-server4 ... more default configuration
but there sites advise use webapp file mod-mono virtual host configuration. example, modify /etc/mono-server4/debian.webapp
this:
<apps> <web-application> <name>default</name> <vpath>/</vpath> <path>/var/www/</path> <vhost>127.0.0.1</vhost> </web-application> </apps>
both approaches need apache site sethandler mono
configuration setting.
the difference noticed sites configuration have explicitly define mod-mono-server4 (otherwise system trying start server2 instance not installed). when configured via sites configuration seems there additional mono_server process spawned.
i guess should go webapp option, there "big" differences between 2 approaches? webapp configuration distribution specific or why there 2 options anyway?
webapp config file approach can used stand-alone xsp4, without need of apache. example, can run:
xsp4 --appconfigfile etc/mono-server4/debian.webapp
and you'll xsp4 working webapp config file.
Comments
Post a Comment