Has any development been done for supporting Windows Vista yet, or is it
planned by anyone soon?
The reason I ask is that the server doesn't seem to run as a service on
Windows Vista. I logged this as a bug and asked about it on the user
mailing too recently, but had no reply to either, so
We encountered the following bug: httpd segfaulted due to a client
emitting Cache-Control: max-age=216000, max-stale which is a
perfectly valid header.
The segfault is caused by the fact that ap_cache_liststr() sets the
value pointer to NULL when there is no value, and this isn't checked
Steve Hay wrote:
Has any development been done for supporting Windows Vista yet, or is it
planned by anyone soon?
Hi Steve. Do you mean are we accepting patches to solve problems on Vista?
Sure. Do you mean is there a person assigned to resolve such issues? No
(and that's true of all
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Steve Hay wrote:
Has any development been done for supporting Windows Vista yet, or is it
planned by anyone soon?
Hi Steve. Do you mean are we accepting patches to solve problems on Vista?
Sure. Do you mean is there a person assigned to resolve such issues? No
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
You would be better off annotating the appropriate bug about apache 2.2
compatibility with vista and add your observations there.
Steve - I'll give you another out that might be useful.
Because at this point it seems to be less-than-bugs, more-than-gotchas
to
On Wed, 2 May 2007, Niklas Edmundsson wrote:
We encountered the following bug: httpd segfaulted due to a client emitting
Cache-Control: max-age=216000, max-stale which is a perfectly valid header.
The segfault is caused by the fact that ap_cache_liststr() sets the value
pointer to NULL when
Mario Brandt wrote:
First off, the apache install tries to create the conf directories
and subsequent conf files as the install progresses.
Vista throws a fit and wont create the files, presum. due to permissions.
If you can, grab the configuration files from a different install and copy
I've already overcome the difficulties of *installing* apache, much as
you describe below, and I also found that if you create a batch file to
run the MSI and then run that batch file as an administrator (using the
runas command) then things work better. I'll add this to the Wiki
later after
I had 2.2.4 working on Vista RC2 but it has expired (no cash to upgrade :p)
I did have UAC off and I installed it as I usually do by compiling the
source and running httpd.exe -k install.
I've had someone report that opening and admin console (cmd.exe with
admin rights) works aswel. But you
Hello,
Using Apache 1.x I had it running in a command prompt (i.e. just typing
apache.exe), but the service wouldn't start.
I never tried 1.x. For myself I think it is out of date.
Using Apache 2.2.4, I can't start it either way so far.
Do you actually have the server *running* on Vista, either
I can run it in a command prompt
I installed the latest 2.2.4-ssl on Vista business. Log file attached
in a seperate email to wrowe. The following 2 command windows popped up
for service install and service start:
Installing the Apache2 service
(OS 5)Access is denied. : Failed to open the
Steve Hay wrote:
I've already overcome the difficulties of *installing* apache, much as
you describe below, and I also found that if you create a batch file to
run the MSI and then run that batch file as an administrator (using the
runas command) then things work better. I'll add this to the
Your comment about UAC rang a bell for me. I'd forgotten about that. So
I just tried turning UAC off and tried a fresh installation and now it
all works fine! The configuration files are all created correctly, the
service gets installed, and even starts up OK!
The really weird thing is that
I also had the same two errors for service install service start, plus
a load of other errors that flashed past very quickly which I think were
errors about configuration files not getting created.
All three sets of errors went away when I tried again with UAC turned
off. I'll send Bill logs
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Steve Hay wrote:
I've already overcome the difficulties of *installing* apache, much as
you describe below, and I also found that if you create a batch file to
run the MSI and then run that batch file as an administrator (using the
runas command) then things work
Mario Brandt wrote:
Hello,
Using Apache 1.x I had it running in a command prompt (i.e. just typing
apache.exe), but the service wouldn't start.
I never tried 1.x. For myself I think it is out of date.
Using Apache 2.2.4, I can't start it either way so far.
Do you actually have the server
On May 1, 2007, at 1:49 AM, Jan Schütze wrote:
*Base Dir Safemode*
Do we got something like this(e.g. like in php), yet?
If by Base Dir you mean a base path for relative paths in
configuration, it's done. If you man something else, I don't know
what you mean.
Safe mode: only what is
On 5/2/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: bnicholes
Date: Wed May 2 09:31:39 2007
New Revision: 534533
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=534533
Log:
re-introduce ap_satisfies API back into core and modify how the access_checker,
check_user_id and auth_checker
Thanks for the fast comments to Paul and Brian!
If by Base Dir you mean a base path for relative paths in configuration
With base dir I meant protection, so that the script can't access the
path beyond it. In some cases it is bad, if a webscript can read the
passwordfile of the server or on a
On 5/2/2007 at 11:47 AM, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Joshua Slive
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 5/2/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: bnicholes
Date: Wed May 2 09:31:39 2007
New Revision: 534533
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=534533
Log:
re-introduce
Adds ability to get to r.connection and r.server. Also renamed back to
apw_request_push per discussion with Brian M.
This works now:
function quick_handler(r)
r.headers_out[Lua] = Rulez;
h = r.headers_out
val = r.headers_in[User-Agent];
h[Test] = HELP;
h[Browser] = val;
On 5/2/07, Brad Nicholes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah, that's where I mentioned that things might look a little confusing.
There actually is a good reason to have both and yes some of the functionality
can overlap. The reason for having mod_authz_host is so that host, IP, ENV,
etc. can
On 5/2/2007 at 1:47 PM, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Joshua Slive
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 5/2/07, Brad Nicholes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah, that's where I mentioned that things might look a little confusing.
There actually is a good reason to have both and yes some of the
On Apr 28, 2007, at 1:40 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
In fact, to be honest, it would be easier still to just
update ftp_direntry_get() to use apr_fnmatch(), since we
always want to support globing. ftp_direntry_get already
does most of what makes apr_match_glob attractive in
the 1st place.
APACHE 2.0 STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2007-05-01 10:37:33 -0400 (Tue, 01 May 2007) $]
The current version of this file can be found at:
* http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/2.0.x/STATUS
Documentation status is
APACHE 2.2 STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2007-05-01 09:22:52 -0400 (Tue, 01 May 2007) $]
The current version of this file can be found at:
* http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS
Documentation status is
APACHE 2.3 STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2006-08-22 16:41:03 -0400 (Tue, 22 Aug 2006) $]
The current version of this file can be found at:
* http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/STATUS
Documentation status is maintained
27 matches
Mail list logo
