Apache installation question?

[cjs500]

I've playing with linux for about 6 months and starting to get more comfortable with it but would like an oppinion from others.

I've been having a hell of a time trying to update apache 2.0.52 by using an rpm file. I'm always getting stuck with problems of have conflicts, dependancies, etc. Using up2date and yum doesn't seem to have the updates I'm looking for so I have been trying to get things installed manually. There must be an easier way to update without getting stuck in this library hell.

I have had better sucess compiling the binaries than building RPM's but if you compile it, how can you tell what is installed, etc. since rpm's are nice in the way of running queries on installed components.

Also what is safer to run Apache 1.3.x or 2.x?

Thanks!

[Choozo]

Apache 1.3.x are well tried with a mileage few can boast.

Look into your reasons for upgrading Apache;
- Any feature you badly need?
- Security patches in 2.x you badly need?
- Problems running the current version?

If no on all above, stick with what just plain works.

[cjs500]

I'm trying to build a test platform with 2.0.52. I am using Fedora Core 1 and have taken the source and compiled rpm files. I just can't seem to get things to install right or at all. It'll either be problems with dependancy of other packages. What is the best way to deal with rpm issues? Should I start removing and updating everything before I can get the apache install to go in? Or.. do you just compile it and forget rpm installations all together?

I started a new install of fedora core 1, custom and minimum to start installing required rpm's as I need them but of course it needs newer c compilers and other updates. This being with an install attempt with apache 1.3.33 and not in rpm form. Says I'm missing the C compiler and once again trying to install updated or required rpms that just won't go without removing it seems everything that is dependant to update or install the needed.

Being new to a system is frustrating. Thanks!