Re: [gentoo-user] Can anyone tell me?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hello Mark, I was under the impression that packages with the ~amd64 (or ~x86) keywords are in testing, but no serious instabilities had been found, or they would be hard masked. I have had non-testing packages break my system before, as well. What generally happens is the the environment variables become messed up, or the service dependencies do - either way, I can't use emerge or any of the available utilities to fix the problem, or even find out what it does. About a year ago, I went to a testing system and haven't had any problems, except when I re-install Gentoo. I guess it is always a choice - either go with the stable version of a distribution or you go with the testing version (some people really push the envelope and go for the unstable version). I read up on the keywords, and found out that having the ~mad64 keyword on a package just means that it hasn't been adequately tested on that architecture. That's how people like me help move things along - by testing those packages on our systems, and reporting any problems we find. Regards, Chris Mark Knecht wrote: | On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 11:09 AM, Chris Walters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Hello, | | Can anyone tell me what packages you know of that will break your system if you | choose to put ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~amd64 in your make.conf file? I have had my | system break, twice now, from a package upgrade - I think that one of the | culprits is gawk, but can't be certain. | | I do know that the only way to fix the problem was to restore from backup, or | to try re-installing again. I just want to know which packages are so unstable | that I should mask them. TIA. | | Regards, | Chris | | | Hi Chris, |I don't think your question can be answered as phrased. | |*Any* package marked with '~' is 'new', 'in testing', 'unstable', | etc. Very few (in my experience) 'break' my machine, but I have a rule | that any package energed as part of emerge system must be stable and I | personally add ~x86 or ~amd64 only for specific packages that I want | or need some new feature. | | Hope this helps, | Mark -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFHypMsUx1jS/ORyCsRCg3SAJ9RjQk0hCUPo1oLfGRJR0gBYOdEmACfaoL+ 0Vb2FeuvF/RoA2MWEZjAs9U= =Gp0G -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Can anyone tell me?
On Sunday 02 March 2008, Dan Farrell wrote: Can anyone tell me what packages you know of that will break your system if you choose to put ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~amd64 in your make.conf file? I have had my system break, twice now, from a package upgrade - I think that one of the culprits is gawk, but can't be certain. I do know that the only way to fix the problem was to restore from backup, or to try re-installing again. I just want to know which packages are so unstable that I should mask them. TIA. doesn't sound like a broken package to me. perhaps something else got borked? Or maybe some unusual compiler settings? OP, please post your /etc/make.conf -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Can anyone tell me?
On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 14:09:45 -0500, Chris Walters wrote: Can anyone tell me what packages you know of that will break your system if you choose to put ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~amd64 in your make.conf file? I have had my system break, twice now, from a package upgrade - I think that one of the culprits is gawk, but can't be certain. I run two completely ~amd64 systems here and have very few problems. I do know that the only way to fix the problem was to restore from backup, or to try re-installing again. I just want to know which packages are so unstable that I should mask them. TIA. The ~ in ~amd64 means the ebuilds are in testing, not that they, or the software they install, are considered unstable in the likely to crash meaning of the term. Because you are using bleeding edge ebuilds, there is the odd occasion when things don't play nicely together, or mistakes are made. The gawk problem one one such situation, where it depended on a library in /usr/lib and broke any system with /usr on a separate filesystem. It didn't require a reinstall to fix, I know because I was hit by it and didn't reinstall. It was a one-off that was fixed quickly, if you didn't sync and update each day you could easily have missed it. The testing ebuilds are for just that, it is only by people using them and reporting problems that those problems are kept out of the stable tree. If you are not prepared to deal with the occasional problem, running a testing system is not for you. -- Neil Bothwick There's an old proverb that says just about whatever you want it to signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Can anyone tell me?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Neil Bothwick wrote: | On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 14:09:45 -0500, Chris Walters wrote: | I run two completely ~amd64 systems here and have very few problems. I've run testing on Gentoo and other distributions. With Gentoo, for over a year, with few problems, and those were generally easily fixed. | The ~ in ~amd64 means the ebuilds are in testing, not that they, or the | software they install, are considered unstable in the likely to crash | meaning of the term. Because you are using bleeding edge ebuilds, there | is the odd occasion when things don't play nicely together, or mistakes | are made. The gawk problem one one such situation, where it depended on a | library in /usr/lib and broke any system with /usr on a separate | filesystem. It didn't require a reinstall to fix, I know because I was | hit by it and didn't reinstall. It was a one-off that was fixed quickly, | if you didn't sync and update each day you could easily have missed it. | | The testing ebuilds are for just that, it is only by people using them | and reporting problems that those problems are kept out of the stable | tree. If you are not prepared to deal with the occasional problem, | running a testing system is not for you. I find these paragraphs to be rude and insulting. I am not an idiot - I know exactly what testing means, and what unstable means. Just because I ask a relatively simple question in this group does not mean that I am not prepared to deal with the occasional problem. Were that the case, I would not be working with computers at all, since all operating systems and distributions have an occasional problem even in their stable branches. Chris -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFHyt3tUx1jS/ORyCsRCt5YAJ9yTa9Bz9zWJjgn9moyE2mi/0FIGgCfX3OY KWvc1mFs3pZiOOJIZuwE7dY= =m3jB -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Can anyone tell me?
On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 12:03:44 -0500 Chris Walters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I find these paragraphs to be rude and insulting. I am not an idiot - I know exactly what testing means, and what unstable means. Just because I ask a relatively simple question in this group does not mean that I am not prepared to deal with the occasional problem. Were that the case, I would not be working with computers at all, since all operating systems and distributions have an occasional problem even in their stable branches. Chris If I may speak for Neil, he provides a lot of very useful information to the list and is a very courteous poster as well. In my mind, that little lemming that somehow appears along with his emails is the sign of a good addition to the thread. I'm sure he didn't mean to insult you. I hope that you agree that even though you started the thread, the information he gave could be useful to others reading it. I thought it was an informative and well-written post myself, not that yours aren't, but don't be too defensive. We're all here to learn (and perhaps to teach, occasionally at least ;) ) to answer your original question succinctly: Can anyone tell me what packages you know of that will break your system if you choose to put ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~amd64 in your make.conf file? no, no one can tell until they are tested, and then they will be marked stable. If I may take a moment to make a few (friendly and respectful!) criticisms of your post, that may have given people the wrong impression, I think there are probably two things that may have done so: firstly, your subject line was 'Can anyone help me?' Sure, you're asking for help, but a more relevant subject line would have nicely synopsized your post. Most people that start a thread here _are_ looking for help, after all. Secondly, I think this: I do know that the only way to fix the problem was to restore from backup, or to try re-installing again. I just want to know which packages are so unstable that I should mask them. definitely made my blood boil a little. It sounds as if, with your gawk case here, a careful analysis of the log files could have perhaps provided you with a few fundamentals from /usr/lib that were missing and only needed to be copied over to / before /usr or /usr/lib was mounted from it's seperate filesystem. (I am just guessing that's how Neil solved this particular problem, although I wouldn't know.) Saying that the only way to fix a particular problem is by replacing the software with a working version is very rarely the case. I hope you can understand how that could give us a little bit of a bad first impression here on the lists, because it consists of a lot of serious gentooers that all seem to share a dislike of reinstalls and backup restorations rather than responding to particular error messages and resolving their problems that way. Perhaps it's just the gentoo way - reinstalling seems to be very popular in ubuntu. Anyhow, my advice to you is to do what many, including myself do - save yourself the headache of running ~amd64, and only use package.keywords to unmask packages as necessary. Good luck, and may you withhold judgment of me as I have of you, Dan Farrell -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Can anyone tell me?
Alan McKinnon wrote: On Sunday 02 March 2008, Dan Farrell wrote: doesn't sound like a broken package to me. perhaps something else got borked? Or maybe some unusual compiler settings? OP, please post your /etc/make.conf I don't think it is the compiler settings - they are fairly standard -O3 -march=athlon64 -pipe That's it. I've never had any problems with -O3, but it could still be a part of the problem, since it substantially changes the code at compile time. The problem has to do the the Service Dependencies not being able to be scanned, and I am advised to run /sbin/depscan.sh When I run that, I just get the same error - which also involves a missing /bin/mktemp file. It seems that that package blocks that latest version of coreutils... Regards, Chris -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Can anyone tell me?
On Sunday 02 March 2008, Chris Walters wrote: Alan McKinnon wrote: On Sunday 02 March 2008, Dan Farrell wrote: doesn't sound like a broken package to me. perhaps something else got borked? Or maybe some unusual compiler settings? OP, please post your /etc/make.conf I don't think it is the compiler settings - they are fairly standard -O3 -march=athlon64 -pipe That's it. I've never had any problems with -O3, but it could still be a part of the problem, since it substantially changes the code at compile time. I don't -O3 can ever be considered standard. Also you say you don't think that's it, then admit -O3 changes the code substantially. I'm having horrible visions that you are taking a shotgun approach to fault-finding The problem has to do the the Service Dependencies not being able to be scanned, and I am advised to run /sbin/depscan.sh When I run that, I just get the same error - which also involves a missing /bin/mktemp file. It seems that that package blocks that latest version of coreutils... What you wrote doesn't make sense. depscan.sh is installed by baselayout and mktemp is installed by coreutils. You have depscan.sh Which package is blocking which? You don't have to guess which one, portage will tell you when an emerge fails. You really should supply more information so that we can help you. You have now posted 4 times on this thread, and have not supplied any relevant info at all apart from your arch is ~amd64 and you have a problem. So let's do this the right way which involves you supplying the following: - when your system broke twice, what exactly does this mean? What no longer works, and how does the system's behaviour differ from what you expect? - relevant logs - command(s) run before the problem manifests - console output that demonstrates a problem -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Can anyone tell me?
On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 12:03:44 -0500, Chris Walters wrote: I find these paragraphs to be rude and insulting. I am not an idiot - I know exactly what testing means, and what unstable means. Sorry if you feel that way, but many people confuse the various meanings of unstable and stable in the context of software branches. -- Neil Bothwick Oxymoron: Reagan memoirs. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Can anyone tell me?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Alan McKinnon wrote: | On Sunday 02 March 2008, Chris Walters wrote: | Alan McKinnon wrote: | I don't -O3 can ever be considered standard. Also you say you don't | think that's it, then admit -O3 changes the code substantially. I'm | having horrible visions that you are taking a shotgun approach to | fault-finding Say again? How am I taking a shotgun approach to fault-finding? | The problem has to do the the Service Dependencies not being able to | be scanned, and I am advised to run /sbin/depscan.sh | | When I run that, I just get the same error - which also involves a | missing /bin/mktemp file. It seems that that package blocks that | latest version of coreutils... | | What you wrote doesn't make sense. depscan.sh is installed by baselayout | and mktemp is installed by coreutils. You have depscan.sh Which package | is blocking which? You don't have to guess which one, portage will tell | you when an emerge fails. Well, apparently either the latest ~amd64 keyword masked version of coreutils does not install /bin/mktemp, or makes changes so that /sbin/depscan.sh cannot find it, because /bin/mktemp missing is a part of the error message, I receive. When I mask the latest version of coreutils, and merge the older one and the mktemp ebuild, the problem disappears (yes, I was able to get emerge to work - finally). | You really should supply more information so that we can help you. You | have now posted 4 times on this thread, and have not supplied any | relevant info at all apart from your arch is ~amd64 and you have a | problem. So let's do this the right way which involves you supplying | the following: | | - when your system broke twice, what exactly does this mean? What no | longer works, and how does the system's behaviour differ from what you | expect? | - relevant logs | - command(s) run before the problem manifests | - console output that demonstrates a problem I asked for specific and general information in my original message to this list. That was what packages had others, using the ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~amd64, had trouble with. If you have no answer to that question, then you should just say so, or not have bothered to reply. I am not liking the attitude on this list one bit. I didn't ask you, or anyone else to solve a specific problem for me, just a simple general question. If I wanted specific help, I would have provided all that you are claiming I should provide. Chris -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFHyv3mUx1jS/ORyCsRChqaAJsHpoz1bA6ry3id6SXVjdTY5YZasACaAsGE TVslqDzdm1KxKhJNI3t+xi4= =s/VG -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Can anyone tell me?
On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 14:20:08 -0500, Chris Walters wrote: Well, apparently either the latest ~amd64 keyword masked version of coreutils does not install /bin/mktemp, or makes changes so that /sbin/depscan.sh cannot find it, because /bin/mktemp missing is a part of the error message, I receive. % eix -c -e coreutils [I] sys-apps/coreutils ([EMAIL PROTECTED]/01/08): Standard GNU file utilities % qlist coreutils | grep mktemp /usr/share/man/man1/mktemp.1.bz2 /bin/mktemp /usr/bin/mktemp It's certainly there on this box, and the other ~amd64 and ~x86 boxes I have. -- Neil Bothwick Theory is when you know everything, but nothing works. Reality is when everything works, but you don't know why. However, usually theory and reality are mixed together : Nothing works, and nobody knows why not. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Can anyone tell me?
On Sunday 02 March 2008, Chris Walters wrote: Alan McKinnon wrote: snip | What you wrote doesn't make sense. depscan.sh is installed by | baselayout and mktemp is installed by coreutils. You have | depscan.sh Which package is blocking which? You don't have to guess | which one, portage will tell you when an emerge fails. Well, apparently either the latest ~amd64 keyword masked version of coreutils does not install /bin/mktemp, or makes changes so that /sbin/depscan.sh cannot find it, because /bin/mktemp missing is a part of the error message, I receive. When I mask the latest version of coreutils, and merge the older one and the mktemp ebuild, the problem disappears (yes, I was able to get emerge to work - finally). Ah. That's useful info. Are you saying that current coreutils does not supply mktemp (it should), so you have to use an older coreutils and a discrete mktemp ebuild? What's in the build log for the non-working coreutils regarding mktemp? -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-user] Can anyone tell me?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hello, Can anyone tell me what packages you know of that will break your system if you choose to put ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~amd64 in your make.conf file? I have had my system break, twice now, from a package upgrade - I think that one of the culprits is gawk, but can't be certain. I do know that the only way to fix the problem was to restore from backup, or to try re-installing again. I just want to know which packages are so unstable that I should mask them. TIA. Regards, Chris -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFHyanyUx1jS/ORyCsRCkPPAKCDom6TEWG6Wro0ApYt/bnNrS+14gCcCNlc VBfTw5gYqqXTfwsWwb8WiDQ= =+py3 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Can anyone tell me?
On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 11:09 AM, Chris Walters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hello, Can anyone tell me what packages you know of that will break your system if you choose to put ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~amd64 in your make.conf file? I have had my system break, twice now, from a package upgrade - I think that one of the culprits is gawk, but can't be certain. I do know that the only way to fix the problem was to restore from backup, or to try re-installing again. I just want to know which packages are so unstable that I should mask them. TIA. Regards, Chris Hi Chris, I don't think your question can be answered as phrased. *Any* package marked with '~' is 'new', 'in testing', 'unstable', etc. Very few (in my experience) 'break' my machine, but I have a rule that any package energed as part of emerge system must be stable and I personally add ~x86 or ~amd64 only for specific packages that I want or need some new feature. Hope this helps, Mark -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Can anyone tell me?
On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 12:16:36 -0800 Mark Knecht [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 11:09 AM, Chris Walters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hello, Can anyone tell me what packages you know of that will break your system if you choose to put ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~amd64 in your make.conf file? I have had my system break, twice now, from a package upgrade - I think that one of the culprits is gawk, but can't be certain. I do know that the only way to fix the problem was to restore from backup, or to try re-installing again. I just want to know which packages are so unstable that I should mask them. TIA. doesn't sound like a broken package to me. perhaps something else got borked? Regards, Chris Hi Chris, I don't think your question can be answered as phrased. *Any* package marked with '~' is 'new', 'in testing', 'unstable', etc. Very few (in my experience) 'break' my machine, but I have a rule that any package energed as part of emerge system must be stable and I personally add ~x86 or ~amd64 only for specific packages that I want or need some new feature. My experience is the same as Mark's. I use ~amd64 only when necessary, and although sometimes it doesn't work or is buggy afterwords (after all, it's testing) it has never once broken the system. That having been said, I wouldn't use it for system critical anything (other than the kernel). Hope this helps, Mark -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Can anyone tell me where I've loused-up this apache config?
Steve [Gentoo] wrote: What's wrong? If you are using the default config that comes with apache, there should be a file in /etc/apache2/modules.d/ that contains a correctly setup SSL host. You may need to add -D SSL to APACHE2_OPTS in /etc/conf.d/apache2 to enable it. You shouldn't need to add SSL stuff to the normal vhosts in the vhosts.d directory. If you no longer have the default config files, you can find them here: http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/apache/trunk/dist/2.0/conf/ -- Michael Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo Developerhttp://dev.gentoo.org/~vericgar GnuPG Key ID 0x08614788 available on http://pgp.mit.edu -- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-user] Can anyone tell me where I've loused-up this apache config?
This time a bamboozling Apache/vhost/https problem. I have a working vhost configuration for several domains in apache2 (latest stable from portage - 2.0.58) and I want to support not only http services, but, for one domain name at least, I want to support an https service. The working configuration for http has a 00_default_vhost.conf file:- -- NameVirtualHost *:80 VirtualHost *:80 DocumentRoot /var/www/vlan.mydomain.net ServerName vlan.mydomain.net /VirtualHost VirtualHost *:80 ServerName temporary.mydomain.net DocumentRoot /var/www/temporary.mydomain.net /VirtualHost -- I updated this (following a how-to as closely as I could...) to this: -- NameVirtualHost *:80 NameVirtualHost *:443 VirtualHost *:80 DocumentRoot /var/www/vlan.mydomain.net ServerName vlan.mydomain.net /VirtualHost VirtualHost *:80 ServerName temporary.mydomain.net DocumentRoot /var/www/temporary.mydomain.net /VirtualHost VirtualHost *:443 DocumentRoot /var/www/ssl.mydomain.net ServerName ssl.mydomain.net SSLCipherSuite HIGH:MEDIUM SSLProtocol all -SSLv2 SSLCertificateFile /etc/apache2/ssl.crt/ssl.mydomain.net.crt SSLCertificateKeyFile /etc/apache2/ssl.crt/ssl.mydomain.key SSLCertificateChainFile /etc/apache2/ssl.crt/mydomain.crt SSLCACertificateFile /etc/apache2/ssl.crt/mydomain.crt /VirtualHost -- I believe that I've put valid crt and key files in /etc/apache2/ssl.crt/ - and I'd have expected an error message at least if this is, in fact, the fault. When I parse this configuration with apache2 and the flags from /etc/conf.d/apache2 (i.e. SSL ) this is how it goes : -- # apache2 -D SSL --lint # apache2 -D SSL -S VirtualHost configuration: wildcard NameVirtualHosts and _default_ servers: *:443 is a NameVirtualHost default server ssl.mydomain.net (/etc/apache2/vhosts.d/00_default_vhost.conf:12) port 443 namevhost ssl.mydomain.net (/etc/apache2/vhosts.d/00_default_vhost.conf:12) *:80 is a NameVirtualHost default server vlan.mydomain.net (/etc/apache2/vhosts.d/00_default_vhost.conf:24) port 80 namevhost vlan.mydomain.net (/etc/apache2/vhosts.d/00_default_vhost.conf:24) port 80 namevhost temporary.mydomain.net (/etc/apache2/vhosts.d/00_default_vhost.conf:37) Syntax OK -- Unfortunately, when I attempt to connect to the SSL service on http://ssl.mydomain.net/ using Firefox I get an immediate error : The connection was interrupted The connection to ssl.shic.dynalias.net was interrupted while the page was loading. Links (the text browser) gives the somewhat less helpful error message : Error loading https://ssl.mydomain.net/: SSL error Nothing seems to be written to /var/log/apache2/error_log or access_log. I've read reports that I must be explicit about which IP address I want to vhost on - which is undesirable as I want to serve both over Ethernet and Wireless (i.e. I have two network adaptors) - but seems to make no difference if I experimentally substitute my ethernet IP address for * in the vhost configuration. What's wrong? -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Can anyone tell me where I've loused-up this apache config?
Hi, On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 15:06:33 +0100 Steve [Gentoo] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a working vhost configuration for several domains in apache2 (latest stable from portage - 2.0.58) and I want to support not only http services, but, for one domain name at least, I want to support an https service. Important note here: There is _no_ name based virtual hosts when using SSL. That's simply due to that the SSL layer kicks in first, HTTP is staged after that. So NameVirtualHost *:443 does not make sense. Note that name based vhosts are a feature of HTTP (1.1). It analyzes the Hostname header in the Http request. Obviously, this is not possible to archive if an SSL connection should be established first. So basically that means you can only have one SSL server per IP. Just switch to fixed IP configuration instead (for SSL). -hwh -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Can anyone tell me where I've loused-up this apache config?
Hi, sorry, On Tue, 3 Oct 2006 16:48:50 +0200 Hans-Werner Hilse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So basically that means you can only have one SSL server per IP. should have been per IP:Port combination. -hwh -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Can anyone tell me where I've loused-up this apache config?
On Tue, 3 Oct 2006 19:25:17 +0200 Hi, sorry, On Tue, 3 Oct 2006 16:48:50 +0200 Hans-Werner Hilse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So basically that means you can only have one SSL server per IP. should have been per IP:Port combination. -hwh As Mr. Hans-Werner Hilse already explained, you have to assign a different IP address for each SSL vhost. I'll add just an example: NameVirtualHost 10.0.0.222:443 VirtualHost 10.0.0.222:443 ServerName vhost-111.example.com SSLEngine on SSLCertificateFile/path/to/certificates/vhost-111/server.crt SSLCertificateKeyFile /path/to/certificates/vhost-111/server.key /VirtualHost NameVirtualHost 10.0.0.111:443 VirtualHost10.0.0.111:443 ServerName vhost-222.example.com SSLEngine on SSLCertificateFile/path/to/certificates/vhost-222/server.crt SSLCertificateKeyFile /path/to/certificates/vhost-222/server.key /VirtualHost -- Best regards, Daniel -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
