Bug#850885: apache2: Using dwww, fails with internal server error when trying to access /usr/share/doc

reassign 850885 dwww severity 850885 grave tags 850885 patch thanks On Thursday, 12 January 2017 06:50:16 CET Arjan Opmeer wrote: > > is correct however, here's the HTTP header part: > > Content-type: text/html > > Last modified: Tue Dec 13 14:16:35 2016 > > Content-Disposition:

Processed: Re: Bug#850885: apache2: Using dwww, fails with internal server error when trying to access /usr/share/doc

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > reassign 850885 dwww Bug #850885 [apache2] apache2: Using dwww, fails with internal server error when trying to access /usr/share/doc Bug reassigned from package 'apache2' to 'dwww'. No longer marked as found in versions apache2/2.4.25-1.

apache2_2.4.25-2_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable

Accepted: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Format: 1.8 Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2017 19:27:34 +0100 Source: apache2 Binary: apache2 apache2-data apache2-bin apache2-utils apache2-suexec-pristine apache2-suexec-custom apache2-doc apache2-dev apache2-ssl-dev apache2-dbg Architecture:

Processing of apache2_2.4.25-2_amd64.changes

apache2_2.4.25-2_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: apache2_2.4.25-2.dsc apache2_2.4.25-2.debian.tar.xz apache2-bin_2.4.25-2_amd64.deb apache2-data_2.4.25-2_all.deb apache2-dbg_2.4.25-2_amd64.deb apache2-dev_2.4.25-2_amd64.deb

Bug#851122: marked as done (upgrading apache2-utils does not restart htcacheclean)

Your message dated Sat, 14 Jan 2017 19:37:05 + with message-id and subject line Bug#851122: fixed in apache2 2.4.25-2 has caused the Debian Bug report #851122, regarding upgrading apache2-utils does not restart htcacheclean to be marked as done. This

Bug#839227: marked as done (apache2ctl and init.d script conflicted)

Your message dated Sat, 14 Jan 2017 19:37:05 + with message-id and subject line Bug#839227: fixed in apache2 2.4.25-2 has caused the Debian Bug report #839227, regarding apache2ctl and init.d script conflicted to be marked as done. This means that you

Bug#851357: Regression: No longer supports ServerName containing underscore

On Saturday, 14 January 2017 19:36:34 CET Ondřej Surý wrote: > Stefan, > > JFTR underscores in domain names are allowed, just not for hostnames. SRV, > TLSA and other RRs make use of them. But the character restriction for hostnames is valid for all parts of the FQDN of a host. From RFC1035

Bug#851357: Regression: No longer supports ServerName containing underscore

Stefan, JFTR underscores in domain names are allowed, just not for hostnames. SRV, TLSA and other RRs make use of them. O. On 14 January 2017 17:24:09 Stefan Fritsch wrote: On Saturday, 14 January 2017 12:33:55 CET Jonathan Vollebregt wrote: Actually that makes another

Processed: found 839227 in 2.4.10-10, tagging 839227

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > found 839227 2.4.10-10 Bug #839227 [apache2] apache2ctl and init.d script conflicted Marked as found in versions apache2/2.4.10-10. > tags 839227 + jessie Bug #839227 [apache2] apache2ctl and init.d script conflicted Added tag(s) jessie. > thanks

Bug#851357: Regression: No longer supports ServerName containing underscore

No, the *[ ... ] syntax means an arbitrary number of the thing in the brackets. Ah, I didn't notice the * on the line - my bad I don't think underscores in domain names are allowed in general Not according to the original specification: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1034.txt But according

Bug#851357: Regression: No longer supports ServerName containing underscore

On Saturday, 14 January 2017 12:19:17 CET Jonathan Vollebregt wrote: > Does this mean it's now impossible to create virtual hosts in apache for > domain names with underscores? > > Unless they've silently added a DomainName directive somewhere this > change breaks virtual hosts with

Bug#851357: Regression: No longer supports ServerName containing underscore

On Saturday, 14 January 2017 12:33:55 CET Jonathan Vollebregt wrote: > Actually that makes another point: according to RFC952 hostnames are > allowed only a single period: > > http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc952.txt > > > ::= *["."] > >::= [*[]] > > Unless this was updated in another

Bug#851357: Regression: No longer supports ServerName containing underscore

Actually that makes another point: according to RFC952 hostnames are allowed only a single period: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc952.txt > ::= *["."] >::= [*[]] Unless this was updated in another RFC that means apache shouldn't even support subdomains in virtual hosts, and say

Bug#851357: Regression: No longer supports ServerName containing underscore

It doesn't help that the apache docs on the ServerName directive seem to use domainname and hostname interchangeably (While the restrictions you mentioned only apply to hostnames) > Description: Hostname and port that the server uses to identify itself > Syntax:ServerName

Bug#851357: Regression: No longer supports ServerName containing underscore

Hi Jonathan, while I agree that such changes should not happen within one Debian release and the maintainer might want to relax the rules for the package, the ServerName accepts a hostname as a parameter and a valid hostname cannot contain underscore. So the Apache is behaving correctly here

Bug#851357: Regression: No longer supports ServerName containing underscore

Package: apache2 Version: 2.4.25-1 Severity: important Dear Maintainer, somewhere between 2.4.23-8 and 2.4.25-1 there was a regression that causes apache to ignore ServerName directives containing underscores. I have since tested and confirmed that removing the underscore fixes the problem as