Apache HTTP Server 2.2.16 x86 and x64 Windows Installers

Apache HTTP Server 2.2.16 was released day before yesterday that is 25th July 2010. And here are the 32 and 64 bit Windows binaries that I compiled. They have been compiled with Visual C++ 2008 (VC9) and contain the latest versions of openssl (1.0.0a) and zlib (1.2.5).

As before, the installers and binaries are digitally signed. The signatures should appear valid if you are using Windows 7 or 2008 or your Windows is up to date.



CRC32: 0AA0250D

MD5: C6F2B24AFE22649C762FC7005DB4243E

SHA1: 89C807E1D3ACE1F8D9DA2878E5B871FD72CCD689


CRC32: 774D542B


SHA1: DC862A19DE043BC97A2FEC19DD1BE1A8166931CC


CRC32: 5660CDAE

MD5: B1B4895EB8F68BCFF90201A86AF76D37

SHA1: EAABA10BAEA84764DB8AB90D7A24C39C96F49B34



MD5: 4596D1C86ACC046B912F0C6C873C7B0B

SHA1: C93730728F785FF06DAC5293745A937585B43E4A

Related Posts:

Next Post:
Previous Post:


  1. Arthur Blake

    Thanks for creating these builds so fast!

    A couple of questions:

    1. apache_2.2.16-x64-openssl-1.0.0a.msi is about 500K smaller than apache_2.2.15-x64-openssl-0.9.8m.msi … any idea why?

    2. Also, I’m curious why you used open ssl version 1.0.0a instead of 0.9.8o like the official release is bundled with?

  2. Anindya

    You are welcome. 😀

    And here are the answers to your questions.

    1. Its a different build so file sizes may be different this time. Also I noticed that the “manual” directory was smaller this time. Previously the “manual” directory was about 17.7MB but now it’s only about 10.5MB. That may be because I used the unix source to compile this time since the win32 source wasn’t released yet.

    2. When I checked the OpenSSL download page I saw that 1.0.0a was marked as “LATEST” and so thats what I used. The official Apache.org binaries were released after I posted these, so I didn’t know that they were gonna use 0.9.8o. I have no idea why they are not using version 1.0.0 and still sticking with 0.9.8.

  3. Grant

    You rock Anindya!

  4. Glenn

    OK, the reason I went looking for this is because I could not get Apache to install on my new HP G71-340US laptop. It came with Windows 7 Home Premium (64 bit). This is a personal computer for my own development environment. However, I am still suffering much the same problem as I was when trying to install the official build of Apache. I am asked for a Netowrk Domain and Server Name. My memory recalls that I previously entered in both fields and it worked just fine under Windows 2000, which was what my previous computer was running before it suffered a hard drive failure. (I got all my data before it gasped its last breath! 🙂 )

    The error message I am getting now as I try to start Apache, regardles of using this build or the official one from Apache (so I’m thinking the issue may not be with this build), is as follows:

    httpd.exe: Could not reliably determine the server’s fully qualified domain name
    , using for ServerName
    (OS 10048)Only one usage of each socket address (protocol/network address/port)
    is normally permitted. : make_sock: could not bind to address
    no listening sockets available, shutting down
    Unable to open logs
    Note the errors or messages above, and press the key to exit.

    I don’t know if this is relevent, but I am currently connected to a shared broadband connection via a cable modem and routers where I live. Any thoughts or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

    • Anindya

      The problem you are having is not because you entered as Network Domain and Server Name. Its happening because some other software in your laptop is currently using port 80. In most cases it is Skype. But it may also be some other software in your case. 🙂

      If its Skype, go to Tools > Options > Advanced > Connection, and then uncheck “Use port 80 and 443 as alternatives for incoming connections”.

  5. Glenn

    It works!

    Thanks so much. Yeah, it was the port Skype was using. Skype doesn’t use that port anymore. 🙂

Leave a Comment

Notify me of follow-up comments via e-mail.