From: André Malo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 08 December 2002 00:13
* Sander Striker wrote:
I tagged the 2.0 tree just yet as STRIKER_2_0_44_PRE1 in an
attempt to get the 2.0.44 show on the road. Please test and
point out any problems.
uhm. docs-problem ;-)
Thanks for the heads
On 8 Dec 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+ pThe output filters are never applied on proxy requests./p
Perhaps I'm missing something, but the mod_proxy docs contain the
following:
Proxy http://example.com/foo/*
SetOutputFilter INCLUDES
/Proxy
Either what you wrote contradicts this, or
while cleaning up the 2.1 auth docs, some things bubbled up, that are worth
to patch, imho :) If all patches are applied, applying them in the
described order should work. But before a general question: What's the
reason, that Auth*Provider cannot be determined in .htaccess files?
The worst
--On Sunday, December 8, 2002 7:09 PM + [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
@@ -1691,6 +1693,18 @@
c-child_cleanup = child_cleanup;
c-next = p-cleanups;
p-cleanups = c;
+if(magic_cleanup) {
+ if(!magic_cleanup(data))
+ ap_log_error(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_WARNING, NULL,
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
Your editor seems to have been tab-happy.
Most likely... There is one true indent :)
Would it be better to simplify as:
ap_register_cleanup_ex(p, (void *) (long) fd, fd_cleanup, fd_cleanup,
domagic ? fd_magic_cleanup : NULL);
I considered that, (in addition
--On Sunday, December 8, 2002 3:16 PM +0100 André Malo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
while cleaning up the 2.1 auth docs, some things bubbled up, that
are worth to patch, imho :) If all patches are applied, applying
them in the described order should work. But before a general
question: What's the
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Would it be better to simplify as:
ap_register_cleanup_ex(p, (void *) (long) fd, fd_cleanup, fd_cleanup,
domagic ? fd_magic_cleanup : NULL);
I considered that, (in addition to having the else call the non-ex)
and can't recall why I decided against it (I think
I'm gonna go ahead and commit. 2.0 is definitely wrong. We can
update the URL again if needed.
-wsv
On Saturday, December 7, 2002, at 01:58 AM, André Malo wrote:
- http://httpd.apache.org/docs-2.0/install.html
+ http://httpd.apache.org/docs-2.1/install.html
This point is unclear. We
I got em.
-wsv
On Sunday, December 8, 2002, at 12:32 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
Haven't had a chance to look at this patch, but the rest of them look
good. +1. (*mumble about not having time to commit anything right
now*) -- justin
Can somebody give me hint how to get Apache 2.0.43, perchild
and mod_php4 running to do some testing?
When I try to connect with http://192.168.0.1
I will get no answer (browser ist loading, loading, loading
httpd.conf:
Listen 80
ServerAdmin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ServerName 192.168.0.1:80
On Sun, Dec 08, 2002, Jochen Kächelin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can somebody give me hint how to get Apache 2.0.43, perchild
and mod_php4 running to do some testing?
perchild is broken right now. Unless you're willing to do some coding,
don't expect it to work :/
However, it appears that you're
Can somebody give me hint how to get Apache 2.0.43, perchild
and mod_php4 running to do some testing?
JE perchild is broken right now. Unless you're willing to do some coding,
JE don't expect it to work :/
Will perchild work on the next release or are there any other
workarounds to secure
On Sun, Dec 08, 2002 at 10:57:32PM +0100, Jochen Kächelin wrote:
Will perchild work on the next release or are there any other
workarounds to secure php-scripts (module) such as suEXEC and cgis?
if you *need* mod_php instances that run as seperate users the
easiest solution is to reverse proxy
* Wilfredo Sánchez wrote:
I'm gonna go ahead and commit. 2.0 is definitely wrong. We can
update the URL again if needed.
ok, noted.
nd
--
$_=q?tvc!uif)%*|#Bopuifs!A`#~tvc!Xibu)%*|qsjou#Kvtu!A`#~tvc!KBQI!)*|~
tvc!ifmm)%*|#Qfsm!A`#~tvc!jt)%*|(Ibdlfs(~ # What the hell is JAPH? ;
* Wilfredo Sánchez wrote:
I got em.
-wsv
On Sunday, December 8, 2002, at 12:32 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
Haven't had a chance to look at this patch, but the rest of them look
good. +1. (*mumble about not having time to commit anything right
now*) -- justin
cool,
Hi there,
Options -FollowSymLinks (and Options -SymLinksIfOwnerMatch) do not appear
to be honoured by mod_dir, mod_autoindex, or mod_negotiation in the
current codebase.
There is an open bug report about the mod_dir issue (bugzilla id 14206);
this mail addresses the three of them together.
* Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
What's the reason, that Auth*Provider cannot be
determined in .htaccess files? The worst case would be a 500,
similar to the usage of AuthDBM* directives, if no mod_authn_dbm
is configured, so I see no problem in .htaccess-allowed *Provider
directives.
We did
hi,
Will perchild work on the next release or are there any other
workarounds to secure php-scripts (module) such as suEXEC and cgis?
Yes, there is mod_cgiwrap/mod_phpcgiwrap which will transparently wrap scripts
into the user's UID. Due to lack of time, the original author (Steven Haryanto)
AddModule doesn't exist...
Index: server/config.c
===
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/httpd-2.0/server/config.c,v
retrieving revision 1.156
diff -u -r1.156 config.c
--- server/config.c 12 Sep 2002 20:04:07 - 1.156
+++
Sander Striker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I tagged the 2.0 tree just yet as STRIKER_2_0_44_PRE1 in an
attempt to get the 2.0.44 show on the road. Please test and
point out any problems.
uhm. docs-problem ;-)
Thanks for the heads up. I'll correct this in the PRE2 tag.
Sorry for leaving
20 matches
Mail list logo
