Hi all,
My colleague and I have mocked up a graphic image to help depict the
difference between request and response tests[1]. I'd appreciate your
review and feedback of this image. It was built in OODraw if anyone
wants a copy to hack on for themselves.
Thanks,
William
[1]
Sander Temme wrote:
On Apr 29, 2004, at 10:59 PM, Amit Athavale wrote:
May be DAV ACL is the way to go ?
AFAIK WebDAV+ACL+some kind authentication serves the purpose where each
user having it own area and he can play with permissions of files
and yet you have
private repository and user
No Message Collected
At 08:21 PM 4/29/2004, C.J. Collier wrote:
This project made me think that perhaps Apache should be able to read/write config
files that aren't so difficult to parse.
:) Many of us agree...
Of course, the first example of an easy-to-parse config file format was XML. But I
realize that this
On Thu, Apr 29, 2004 at 09:43:34AM -0700, Mathihalli, Madhusudan wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Joe Orton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[SNIP]
What if the user really sent a
large value for a small file ? Instead of erroring out -
thanks to the
overflow mechanism, we'll probably
C.J. Collier wrote:
I'm new to the list so please forgive my ignorance. I've had an idea
for a few years (I'm sorry for waiting so long to voice it) involving
the configuration of Apache. I tried to write an apache config file
reader/writer in Perl a year and a half ago or so, and it went
* Eli Marmor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
7. Elegance.
I tend to disagree.
XML configuration is not elegant. Especially when you need to start quoting
shell stuff and regexps for XML.
XML configs are huge. This will blow up a typical 8k configuration file at
least to 32k or more.
XML is slow and
Andre Malo wrote:
Eli Marmor wrote:
7. Elegance.
I tend to disagree.
XML configuration is not elegant. Especially when you need to start quoting
shell stuff and regexps for XML.
XML configs are huge. This will blow up a typical 8k configuration file at
least to 32k or more.
XML is
After rolling out a -rHEAD at a site using digest - took them a while
to guess
the Seed thing below.
Dw
dyn-203:~/ASF/apache-1.3 dirkx$ cvs diff -u Announcement src/CHANGES
Enter passphrase for key '/Users/dirkx/.ssh/id_rsa':
Index: Announcement
Hi,
We are trying to compile Apache 2.0.49 source with worker MPM and used the following
commands:
./configure --prefix=/usr/local/apache --enable-so --with-mpm=worker
make
make install
But somehow after the compilation, I am seeing that it has included the prefork MPM
instead of worker MPM
If you had earlier compiled with default MPM i.e. prefork then
do make clean after configure and before running make
If not :
1 which OS you are using ?
2 Go through config.log and see for any errors.
~Amit
Kotla, Satya (Corporate, consultant) wrote:
Hi,
We are trying to compile Apache 2.0.49
Kotla, Satya (Corporate, consultant) wrote:
But somehow after the compilation, I am seeing that it has included the prefork MPM instead of worker I
Weel, I suppose that your system is FreeBSD?
Because problems with libs (threads), doens't possible compilation
multithread in FreeBSD with http
Greg Stein wrote:
Eesh. This has tended to come up w.r.t mod_dav for over five years now. My
point of view is best summarized in this email:
http://mailman.lyra.org/pipermail/dav-dev/2000-November/001746.html
I really don't recommend it. Why do you need to have different owners for
the files?
Joshua Slive wrote:
If you really want apache to behave like samba, then I suppose you don't
mind if apache runs as root. Then it becomes rather more simple to do the
sort of things you are interested in. It also becomes rather more simple
to compromise your box.
If I don't run Apache, then I
* Graham Leggett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Keep in mind the application I am thinking about is not webserver
that's trying to be a fileserver, but rather a fileserver that just
happens to use the DAV protocol. I don't see the security risks of
running Apache as root as being any different
André Malo wrote:
Hmm. I suspect, the difference is, that Apache was never designed to run as
root.
You're assuming the root account is the most damaging account to
compromise. In the case of a fileserver, you will very likely want some
files kept more private than others. If I as a hacker
On Apr 30, 2004, at 10:26 AM, Graham Leggett wrote:
Keep in mind the application I am thinking about is not webserver
that's trying to be a fileserver, but rather a fileserver that just
happens to use the DAV protocol. I don't see the security risks of
running Apache as root as being any
I am not running FreeBSD. Our system is on Red Hat Advanced Server 2.1. Somehow
--with-mpm=worker option does not seem to work and during compilation for Apache
2.0.49, it is including prefork MPM only. What can we do for this?
-Original Message-
From: ranier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Satya,
On Apr 30, 2004, at 9:46 AM, Kotla, Satya ((Corporate, consultant))
wrote:
I am running RedHat Advanced Server 2.1. I have now upzipped the
httpd-2.0.49.tar.gz file afresh and compiled with worker MPM. But
again it is including only the prefork MPM. I am attaching the
config.log file
Sander,
Thanks a lot for the suggestion. I have now compiled --with-mpm=worker
using all lower case letters and it worked fine.
I am now able to see worker.c as a list of Compiled in module when I
give the ./httpd -l command.
Thanks
Satya
-Original Message-
From: Sander Temme
20 matches
Mail list logo
