On Wednesdayen den 31 July 2002 23.16, David Walser wrote: > --- Oden Eriksson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yes..., it's a very sensible tightrope to walk, > > either usable and less > > secure, or not, I don't know how to accomplish both, > > maybe someone else does? > > Well, reasonable decisions have to be made. If > they're going to err on the side of overextreme > caution (as them seem to be with apache) they need to > give an easier way to get things working than becoming > an expert on apache configuration (and on how they > have done theirs), something quick, easy, and obvious.
Yes, true. I thought it would be polite to allways ship the vanilla httpd2.conf file, that's included in the apache2 stuff. One way of doing it would be to use a simple no-brainer httpd2.conf file for these people. Maybe one could chose what level apache should be configured this way? > > It's very hard to comply to unknown issues since no > > one seems to care much > > for apache2. Maybe issues would start pouring in if > > an Mandrake employee took > > over my apache2 packages, or..., if Mandrake would > > employ me so it's more > > "official"..., I really don't know... I think you're > > the third or fourth > > person mentioning apache2 in this forum since I > > introduced it (and that's > > about 3 months ago!!!)... > > I wish Mandrake would just switch to Apache2 since > everybody else is. I can say a few things about it: > - I really appreciate the work you've been doing on it > - It seems a good bit faster than Apache1 (especially > startup time, maybe it's because it's loading less modules) I wish that too. But..., someone really needs to dwell into the 3rd party modules mess and see which ones will work. Building apache2-2.0.40-20020731 right now... (done...) It should be out on the mirrors soon. Ehh, this one I can't test myself right now..., could you test it please? And, thanks for the appreciation. -- Regards // Oden Eriksson Deserve-IT Networks -> http://d-srv.com
