I do not understand what "reported as error" means. I speculate
1. you do not want to see the INFO log on '-t'
2a. you do not want to see WARNINGS, when mod_md finds something to warn about 
in the config? 
2b. you mean that your configuration is fine, and there should be no WARN 
messages at all?

> Am 27.11.2017 um 13:52 schrieb Steffen <i...@apachelounge.com>:
> 
> More info on the bug reported in this thread, Starting service httpd  with 
> mod_md the OS is signaling an error-event
> 
> mod_md is the only module with this behavior, and this should be fixed.
> 
> Also on command line with the -t (test) command I see what is not "normal" 
> for a module. Normaly only errors are the reported but with mod_md I see the 
> info/warning log messages.
> 
> C:\apache24\bin>httpd -t
> [Sun Nov 26 12:46:25.618976 2017] [md:info] [pid 3332:tid 360] AH10071: 
> mod_md (v1.0.3-git), initializing...
> [Sun Nov 26 12:46:25.619977 2017] [md:warn] [pid 3332:tid 360] AH10045: No 
> VirtualHost matches Managed Domain apachelounge.nl
> [Sun Nov 26 12:46:25.619977 2017] [md:warn] [pid 3332:tid 360] AH10045: No 
> VirtualHost matches Managed Domain vosadministraties.nl
> 
> Also when starting with the  -e (show startup errors of level (see LogLevel)) 
> command shows the log entries as error:
> 
> C:\apache24\bin>httpd -e info
> [Sun Nov 26 12:48:47.073747 2017] [md:info] [pid 7384:tid 360] AH10071: 
> mod_md (v1.0.3-git), initializing...
> [Sun Nov 26 12:48:47.073747 2017] [md:warn] [pid 7384:tid 360] AH10045: No 
> VirtualHost matches Managed Domain apachelounge.nl
> [Sun Nov 26 12:48:47.073747 2017] [md:warn] [pid 7384:tid 360] AH10045: No 
> VirtualHost matches Managed Domain vosadministraties.nl
> 
> 
> Did not tested,  but I suspect that also  other loglevels are reported as 
> error.
> 
> 
> Note:
> With the new patch mod_md_ssl_complete.diff  I get when I click view:  
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/patches/2.4.x/mod_md_ssl_complete.diff?view=markup
> 
> An Exception Has Occurred
> Display of files larger than 512 KB disallowed by configuration
> HTTP Response Status
> 403 Forbidden
> 
>  
> On Monday 27/11/2017 at 12:20, Stefan Eissing wrote:
>> FYI: I just updated the mod_md backport proposal. For this, we will work 
>> together in a new branch: "2.4.x-mod_md". This will allow us to make all 
>> needed changes for the Windows Build system together and, once we are 
>> satisfied and have the votes, merge the branch over to 2.4.x. After that, 
>> the 2.4.x-mod_md branch moves into the attic.
>> 
>> I hope this works well for people not that familiar with diff/patch.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> Stefan
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> Am 25.11.2017 um 11:30 schrieb Stefan Eissing 
>>> <stefan.eiss...@greenbytes.de>:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> Am 24.11.2017 um 21:06 schrieb Ruediger Pluem <rpl...@apache.org>:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 11/24/2017 07:22 PM, Steffen wrote:
>>>>> -1 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> *mod_ssl*
>>>>> -----------
>>>>> mod-ssl, as pointed before is going to contain experimental code. Seen so 
>>>>> far only patched mod-ssl tested with mod_md.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> If mod_md is not loaded mod_ssl does nothing different except for one log 
>>>> message. All other code is actually only
>>>> executed if mod_md is loaded.
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> btw.
>>>>> ----
>>>>> I am new to svn and did not used the patches file in /patches but latest 
>>>>> git, 
>>>>> not clear to me against what I have to patch (trunk, 2.4 or trunk_md ?):I 
>>>>> like to see the patched/new files.
>>>> 
>>>> The patches needs to be applied to the svn branch they are proposed 
>>>> against. In this case 2.4.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Two other questions to the patch though:
>>>> 
>>>> 1. mod_md.h is required as it is included by ssl_engine_init.c but it is 
>>>> not included in the patch.
>>> 
>>> The idea was to backport the mod_ssl changes *after* mod_md is backported. 
>>> Then the header would be found. I made the patches separate so that the ssl 
>>> changes would not drown in the other changes.
>>> 
>>>> 2. Who is consumer of modssl_read_encrypted_pkey?
>>> 
>>> Good catch. At one time, I imagined providing encrypted keys from mod_md to 
>>> mod_ssl. However that never happened and the utility function is left 
>>> stranded. Will remove and update the patch.
>>> 
>>> Thanks for reviewing!
>>> 
>>> -Stefan
>>>> 
>>>> Regards
>>>> 
>>>> RĂ¼diger
>> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to