Am 01.06.2013 20:37, schrieb Guenter Knauf:
On 01.06.2013 16:39, Reindl Harald wrote:
IfModule mod_headers.c
Header set X-DNS-Prefetch-Control off
/IfModule
from the network:
x-dns-prefetch-control: off
works for me - just tested on Win32 and NetWare with httpd-trunk:
curl -I http
and even if there is a list-footer at the end of each message
as on many mailing-list you get the same unsubscribe me
posts
it does not matter what you do as list-admin, people
only manage to subscribe, but ignore welcome messages
and any sort of unsubscribe links and the really smart
ones
do it yourself like on any other mailing-list
mail-headers are your friend
list-unsubscribe: mailto:dev-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org
Am 30.05.2013 18:47, schrieb RONALD FARRIER:
Please unsubscribe
On May 30, 2013, at 11:23 AM, Richard Genthner rgenth...@symplicity.com
Am 23.05.2013 15:14, schrieb Dirk-Willem van Gulik:
On 11 May 2013, at 20:26, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
after the connection is established and in case of connect
you have already passed the TCP transmissions and kernel
settings like
net.ipv4.tcp_fin_timeout = 5
();
$start = time();
$fp = fsockopen ($host, '80', $errno, $errstr, 180);
while (!feof($fp))
{
$buffer = fgets($fp, 128);
}
echo (time() - $start) . seconds\n;
flush();
?
Am 11.05.2013 15:08, schrieb Reindl Harald:
Hi
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/mod/mod_reqtimeout.html
i am missing
Am 11.05.2013 19:49, schrieb Eric Covener:
localhost
test with request: 10 seconds
test without request: 41 seconds
As the manual says:
When an AcceptFilter is in use (usually the case on Linux and
FreeBSD), the socket is not sent to the server process before at least
one byte (or the
Am 11.05.2013 20:26, schrieb Eric Covener:
CONFIG proxy.config.net.defer_accept INT 1 of Trafficserver
is a damned good idea in such cases - in real life it takes
never longer than 1 second and even if - it's configureable
Seems to have started that way:
Am 11.05.2013 21:14, schrieb Stefan Fritsch:
On Saturday 11 May 2013, Reindl Harald wrote:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41270 is most
likely unrelated to the problem i see, but nobody and nothing
needs 30 seconds to complete a TCP connection, most requests
including
Am 11.05.2013 21:22, schrieb Reindl Harald:
Am 11.05.2013 21:14, schrieb Stefan Fritsch:
On Saturday 11 May 2013, Reindl Harald wrote:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41270 is most
likely unrelated to the problem i see, but nobody and nothing
needs 30 seconds to complete
https://httpd.apache.org/docs/trunk/mod/mod_ratelimit.html
Provides a filter named RATE_LIMIT to limit client bandwidth.
The connection speed to be simulated is specified, in KiB/s
compared with external mod_bw.so IMHO this is a design mistake
* saying i have several virtual hosts
* my line
Am 10.05.2013 22:38, schrieb Eric Covener:
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
https://httpd.apache.org/docs/trunk/mod/mod_ratelimit.html
Provides a filter named RATE_LIMIT to limit client bandwidth.
The connection speed to be simulated is specified
:19 AM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net
mailto:h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
why do you refuse to understand that we do not need a new feature or at
it is NOT up to you to re-invent the wheel
Apache 2.2 works with proxy and mod_rpaf does not need any change
at 10:02 AM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net
mailto:h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
thank you, this works exactly as expected with Apache 2.4 and
mod_remoteip / mod_security, how i tested is expplained at bottom
PLEASE revisit the mod_security 2.7.2 change
* Fixed
as it helps
because the overall behavior get's unpredictable
however, please do not forget revisit Fixed mod_security displaying wrong ip
address in error.log using apache 2.4 from modsec 2.7.2!
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net
mailto:h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote
can do a lot of harm
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net
mailto:h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
Am 06.05.2013 15:11, schrieb Breno Silva:
Yes.. but we cannot assume all users is doing it right :)
And to be honest i think many are not doing
2013 00:48:40 +0200
Von: Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net
An: Mod Security mod-security-us...@lists.sourceforge.net
well, this would be a workaround but better than nothing
the right solution would be to check how %a and %h
in the httpd-sorce for logging are specified because as
httpd-upstream
Am 03.05.2013 06:35, schrieb Ben Reser:
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Guenter Knauf fua...@apache.org wrote:
isnt that one of the core issues - that folks who dont know what they do run
a webserver? And then, shouldnt these get punished with being hacked so that
they try to learn and finally
Am 03.05.2013 11:38, schrieb André Warnier:
I agree that 404's are legitimate responses.
And I agree that legitimate clients/users can expect to receive them.
But if they do receive them when appropriate, but receive them slower than
other kinds of responses, this is not
really breaking
Am 02.05.2013 10:22, schrieb André Warnier:
These tools must be downloaded separately, installed, configured and
maintained, all by
someone who knows what he's doing. And this means that, in the end (and as
the evidence
shows), only a tiny minority of webservers on the Internet will
Am 01.05.2013 11:37, schrieb Ben Laurie:
Well, no, actually this is not accurate. You are assuming that these
bots are written using blocking io semantics; that if a bot is delayed
by 2 seconds when getting a 404 from your server, it is not able to do
anything else in those 2 seconds. This
Am 01.05.2013 13:14, schrieb Ben Laurie:
The fact you cannot explain the evidence does not invalidate the evidence
what evidence has this thread?
the whole idea of slow down 404 repsones is broken and must never be default
on any setup nor should it be implemented at all - period
Am 01.05.2013 13:51, schrieb André Warnier:
There is so far one possible pitfall, which was identified by someone earlier
on this list : the fact that delaying
404 responses might have a bad effect on some particular kind of usage by
legitimate clients/users. So far, I
believe that such
Am 01.05.2013 14:00, schrieb Reindl Harald:
here you have something to read and learn that more and more attacks
are done this way by exhausting ressources without high bandwith and
THIS are the real problems server-admins have to fight and not the noise
you see on your small site
http
Am 01.05.2013 14:09, schrieb Marian Marinov:
On 05/01/2013 03:00 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
and YES making DOS-attacks easier is treatet as security risk by any
professional auditor and there where i work threat middle means
fix it or shut down the customers project and the last time i got
Am 30.04.2013 12:03, schrieb André Warnier:
As a general idea thus, anything which impacts the delay to obtain a 404
response, should
impact these bots much more than it impacts legitimate users/clients.
How much ?
Let us imagine for a moment that this suggestion is implemented in the
Am 30.04.2013 20:38, schrieb Ben Laurie:
On 30 April 2013 11:14, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
no - this idea is very very bad and if you ever saw a
DDOS-attack from 10 thousands of ip-addresses on a
machine you maintain you would not consider anything
which makes responses
+1 because it does hurt nobody since it's not enabled by
default but improve the sutuation for active users over
the long have it maintained in the httpd-tree
Am 09.03.2013 18:13, schrieb Mario Brandt:
+1
Am Samstag, 9. März 2013 schrieb Jim Jagielski :
I've proposed
Am 25.02.2013 08:54, schrieb Justin Erenkrantz:
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 5:27 AM, Justin Erenkrantz jus...@erenkrantz.com
mailto:jus...@erenkrantz.com wrote:
Anybody know if it still exists in Illumos? This sounds like a fun thing
to tackle next week in Portland. =)
(I'll be
Am 25.02.2013 22:47, schrieb Timothy Wood:
Sending a If or If-Match header with an invalid ETag doesn't result in a 412
Precondition Failed
why in the world should it?
you get back a 200 status code and content
or a 305 Not Modified which you can EASY
implement in any PHP-application too
%defattr(-,root,root)
%{_includedir}/httpd
%{_bindir}/apxs
%dir %{_libdir}/httpd/build
%{_libdir}/httpd/build/*.mk
%{_libdir}/httpd/build/*.sh
%{_sysconfdir}/rpm/macros.httpd
%changelog
* Tue Feb 19 2013 Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net
- update to 2.4.4 RC
- remove a lot of patches
- remove
Am 08.02.2013 06:38, schrieb Reindl Harald:
Am 07.02.2013 21:54, schrieb Stefan Fritsch:
On Thursday 07 February 2013, Reindl Harald wrote:
ErrorLog /var/log/apache_error.log
LogLevel info
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35768
what is here fixed in 2.4.1?
httpd
the best log level
config for your needs.
Cheers
Mario
On 8 February 2013 13:17, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
so because some guys was unhappy with this working behavior and did not
want to use a higher LogLevel we now have to go the other direction and
exlpode our
ErrorLog /var/log/apache_error.log
LogLevel info
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35768
what is here fixed in 2.4.1?
httpd-2.4.3 does not log 404 errors in ErrorLog
imagine admins like me with some hundret vhosts and all
of the systems and templates are developed inside the
Am 07.02.2013 13:39, schrieb Dennis Jacobfeuerborn:
On 02/07/2013 12:26 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
ErrorLog /var/log/apache_error.log
LogLevel info
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35768
what is here fixed in 2.4.1?
httpd-2.4.3 does not log 404 errors in ErrorLog
Am 07.02.2013 14:22, schrieb Dennis Jacobfeuerborn:
with the old behavior it was easy to grep thrugh 404 errors
of any vhost and find broken images in CSS files and so on
Why can't you grep/awk through the access log files the same way you
grep/awk through the error logs? Just because
Am 07.02.2013 21:54, schrieb Stefan Fritsch:
On Thursday 07 February 2013, Reindl Harald wrote:
ErrorLog /var/log/apache_error.log
LogLevel info
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35768
what is here fixed in 2.4.1?
httpd-2.4.3 does not log 404 errors in ErrorLog
imagine
Am 24.01.2013 21:02, schrieb Stefan Fritsch:
On Wednesday 23 January 2013, Reindl Harald wrote:
hi
LoadModuleremoteip_module modules/mod_remoteip.so
RemoteIPHeaderX-Forwarded-For
RemoteIPInternalProxy 127.0.0.1 10.0.0.4 10.0.0.103 91.118.73.4
Am 24.01.2013 21:02, schrieb Stefan Fritsch:
10.0.0.103 - - [23/Jan/2013:17:01:53 +0100] GET
/images/page/tidy_16.gif HTTP/1.1 304 -
http://www.test.rh:8080/; Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
rv:18.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/18.0 (-%)
The problem seems to be ap_get_remote_host() which is
Am 25.01.2013 00:34, schrieb Graham Leggett:
On 24 Jan 2013, at 20:02, Stefan Fritsch s...@sfritsch.de wrote:
The problem seems to be ap_get_remote_host() which is used by the %h
used in the default access log format. But resolving an IP address
that came via X-Forwarded-For does not
Am 25.01.2013 03:47, schrieb Reindl Harald:
Am 25.01.2013 00:34, schrieb Graham Leggett:
On 24 Jan 2013, at 20:02, Stefan Fritsch s...@sfritsch.de wrote:
The problem seems to be ap_get_remote_host() which is used by the %h
used in the default access log format. But resolving an IP address
hi
LoadModuleremoteip_module modules/mod_remoteip.so
RemoteIPHeaderX-Forwarded-For
RemoteIPInternalProxy 127.0.0.1 10.0.0.4 10.0.0.103 91.118.73.4
PHP - fine, exactly how it should do:
_SERVER[SERVER_ADDR] 10.0.0.99
_SERVER[SERVER_PORT] 8080
because a very mixed environement
of vurtual hosts with or without trafficserver
Am 23.01.2013 17:06, schrieb Reindl Harald:
hi
LoadModuleremoteip_module modules/mod_remoteip.so
RemoteIPHeaderX-Forwarded-For
RemoteIPInternalProxy 127.0.0.1 10.0.0.4 10.0.0.103 91.118.73.4
mod_rpaf on httpd 2.2 replaces for sure ANY place like access-log,
error-log and REMOTE_ADDR in scripts with the X-Forwarded-For
from the trusted apache trafficserver
SERVER_ADDR 10.0.0.99
SERVER_PORT 8080
REMOTE_ADDR 10.0.0.103
Am 23.01.2013 18:08, schrieb Reindl Harald:
however
Am 02.09.2012 20:44, schrieb Rainer Jung:
Hi Bill,
On 23.08.2012 23:44, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
Sorry, I'm not ignoring the list (entirely). Seems Thunderbird and my ISP
have decided not to dance anymore and it looks like I'm spending Thursday
doing some fundamental email
Am 21.08.2012 21:25, schrieb William A. Rowe Jr.:
Candidate binaries are available from http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ -
these do not yet constitute ASF releases. Win32 specific artifacts
(x86 binary distribution and -win32-src.zip) will follow sometime later
this evening.
Feedback
Am 01.08.2012 18:25, schrieb William A. Rowe Jr.:
On 4/7/2012 2:00 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 07.04.2012 08:33, schrieb William A. Rowe Jr.:
So we have live registrars, no longer experimental, who are now
registering domains in punycode. Make of it what you will.
Do we want
Am 30.07.2012 22:54, schrieb William A. Rowe Jr.:
What is less clear is what precautions we should take when functioning as
a forward proxy with proxy uri string contents, or presenting user-provided,
non-canonicalized host names. I can imagine such translation being abused to
conceal some
Am 20.06.2012 22:52, schrieb Stefan Fritsch:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012, Nick Edwards wrote:
I posted this to users list last week but no-one bit, so I'm trying here.
With md5crypt no longer recommended for use by its author, will Apache
soon support sha256/sha512 in basic authentication via
Am 20.06.2012 23:19, schrieb Reindl Harald:
Am 20.06.2012 22:52, schrieb Stefan Fritsch:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012, Nick Edwards wrote:
I posted this to users list last week but no-one bit, so I'm trying here.
With md5crypt no longer recommended for use by its author, will Apache
soon
Am 20.06.2012 23:52, schrieb Stefan Fritsch:
you do not need the original password!
you only need a hash-collision and can leave out
special chars completly to find one
You need a password that gives the same value after 1000 rounds of
md5(password md5(password md5(password ...))). This
Am 21.06.2012 00:14, schrieb Stefan Fritsch:
On Wednesday 20 June 2012, Reindl Harald wrote:
there is a reason why even the developer of md5crypt
saw the need for a offical statement that md5crypt
should never again be considered as secure in any case!
http://phk.freebsd.dk/sagas
Am 25.05.2012 10:52, schrieb Bongjae Chang:
Is the watcher thread which is going through all of the connections
looking to see if they have been closed by the peer only solution?
There is no thread.
I see.. then I think that it will be useful if mod_proxy will support the
feature
Am 16.04.2012 17:34, schrieb Mikhail T.:
If the SSL-certificate is the same for all named vhosts configured for the
given IP-address/port-number
combination, why can not the vhosts have different DocumentRoots and other
settings?
because SSL was misdesigned years ago and the Host-Header
Am 15.04.2012 18:54, schrieb Daniel Gruno:
so to me it looks as if either SSI or type assingment is currently
broken - at least on NetWare, not yet tested on other platforms ...
I have tested your SSI tag with 2.4.2 on Debian 6 and Fedora 16 with the
following options set:
Options
Am 07.04.2012 08:33, schrieb William A. Rowe Jr.:
So we have live registrars, no longer experimental, who are now
registering domains in punycode. Make of it what you will.
Do we want to recognize non-ASCII strings in the ServerName|Alias
directives as utf-8 - punycode encodings?
Am 06.04.2012 07:05, schrieb Harish S Rathod:
what about doing like instructed in the welcome-message as
you subscribed or look in the header of every single mail
of every mailing-list out there?
list-unsubscribe: mailto:dev-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org
because you are too lazy to read and
Am 22.03.2012 16:17, schrieb Tom Evans:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 3:15 PM, Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com wrote:
How about providing a simpler way of turning it off, rather than
turning it off by default? Arbitrarily, it seems, you can't use Limit
or LimitExcept to restrict it, and instead
Am 17.03.2012 10:24, schrieb Roy T. Fielding:
On Mar 16, 2012, at 7:18 AM, Eric Covener wrote:
We still enable TRACE by default.
Is this useful enough to justify making every other poor sap with a
security scanner have to manually turn it off?
Yes.
I'm hoping 2.4.x is early enough
Am 21.03.2012 13:48, schrieb Tim Bannister:
On 21 Mar 2012, at 12:39, Reindl Harald wrote:
1 out of a million servers needs TRACE enabled
it was ALWAYS a good idea to disable ANYTHING by default what is not really
needed and this principle will stay
inetd normally ships with echo
Am 21.03.2012 14:41, schrieb Noel Butler:
On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 13:55 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
Firstly, as stated previously, I agree TRACE should be disabled by default
because those that need it are probably
at about 1 in 1, and I'd like to see a proper vote called
Am 21.03.2012 21:02, schrieb Greg Stein:
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 15:59, Mark Montague m...@catseye.org wrote:
On March 21, 2012 15:33 , Roy T. Fielding field...@gbiv.com wrote:
TRACE won't work at all if the most popular end-point doesn't support it.
Why would this be a bad thing? Or, to
Am 04.03.2012 02:35, schrieb Igor Galić:
Hey folks,
or rather: Jeff :)
I'm finally getting around to updating my stack to httpd 2.4.1
(and PHP 5.4) and some things are breaking.
mod_whatkilledus doesn't build with 2.4.1
you are aware that PHP 5.4.0 currently does not support Apache 2.4?
Am 20.01.2012 21:50, schrieb Steffen:
Building with GUI must be possible, always !
why?
That is just the very strong point for building windows
why?
are there really still no options on windows
to compile software automated without a GUI?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital
On 21.12.2011 09:04, Ali Nebi wrote:
Hello,
I would like to make a suggestion to apache web server developer and to open
a discussion related with the way
apache is working currently when a directory where apache must create logs
files does not exists.
and at least fix that apachectl
Am 21.11.2011 19:17, schrieb Stefan Fritsch:
On Monday 21 November 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 11/21/2011 4:49 AM, Steffen wrote:
Observing that the error.log is filling with [http:error] lines,
never seen with 2.2:
[http:error] [pid 3244:tid 2656] (70007)The timeout specified has
Am 19.11.2011 17:44, schrieb Issac Goldstand:
On 19/11/2011 00:38, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
Resource abuse of an .htaccess config in the form of
cpu/memory/bandwidth;
[ ] Represents a security defect
[X] Is not a security defect
The sysadmin knows best. If it's a problem, disable
Am 10.10.2011 00:10, schrieb Igor Galić:
- Original Message -
request time because it normally contains the inode
Which makes it quite useless in a farm with multiple servers
as the same files will have different inodes.
My recomendation is to use size and mtime
well, most setups
Am 06.10.2011 19:03, schrieb Amila Liyanaarachchi:
Hi Dev,
I'm working on a caching protocol similar to HTTP on a different research. I
have the following question regarding
the e-tags.
When does exactly apache computes the e-tag for a certain resource?
Does it compute that when there is
in short:
everybody who is using 1.3 must have sleeped the last years
2.0 will be legacy a year after 2.4 is released what maybe
happens this year or at the begin of 2012
if a software is EOL and removed from the start-page anybody
should consider upgrades
Am 21.09.2011 23:29, schrieb Aalok
Am 09.09.2011 18:10, schrieb William A. Rowe Jr.:
Candidate binaries are available from http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
which do not yet constitute ASF releases. win32-x86 binary distribution
will follow shortly.
This will be a 72 hour vote, which ends no later than Noon ET Monday
Am 02.09.2011 09:39, schrieb Florian Weimer:
* Reindl Harald:
mtime - well, is directly in the header - Last-Modified
size - well, directly in the header - Content-Length
inode - well, where is there any security implication?
I guess you could use it to form an NFS handle, and use
Am 29.08.2011 22:41, schrieb William A. Rowe Jr.:
On 8/29/2011 3:31 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
Jim offered to RM 2.2.20, but I don't know what timezone he is in. If
2.2.20 doesn't happen today, it may be good to publish the patch in an
update to the advisory. But I am in the wrong timezone
Am 23.08.2011 20:52, schrieb Mohamed Dawaina:
please tell me how to unsubscribe from this mailing list
what about looking in the mail-header or login with your acount
you have registered?
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
list-help: mailto:dev-h...@httpd.apache.org
Am 22.08.2011 18:54, schrieb Micha Lenk:
Hi Rüdiger,
On 08/22/2011 06:39 PM CEST +02:00, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
Sorry, I missed the ServerAlias for the IP in the second virtual host.
So, yes in general the second virtual host should be hit.
But using IP addresses as Serveralias is
Are these patches included upstream or anyhow relevant for 2.2.x?
http://www.rocg.uta4you.at/manual/misc/perf-mja.html
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
h.rei...@thelounge.net:
91.118.73.20 failed after I sent the message.
Remote host said: 554 rejected due to virus
--
Mit besten Grüßen, Reindl Harald
the lounge interactive design GmbH
A-1060 Vienna
Am 31.05.2011 20:56, schrieb rascle:
I have 2 servers, one that I pay for and is hosted by a company where I
store all my php files, and a home server where I store all my music, word
documents etc to be used by my website (hosted on the virtual server).
However I was wondering if I could
Am 30.05.2011 20:22, schrieb rascle:
I am wondering if this will lead to any
extra risk towards the 2 personal computers
or if it is only the server which is at risk?
if you forward port 80 only to the server the other machines
are not affected as long nobody hacks your server and gets full
Am 26.05.2011 11:10, schrieb Issac Goldstand:
I just upgraded a machine from 2.2.8 to 2.2.19 and suddenly Apache
wouldn't let me run non-SSL vhosts on port 443. A snippet like below:
VirtualHost a.b.c.d:443
DocumentRoot /home/foo/httpdocs
ServerName foo
Directory /home/foo/httpdocs/
Am 22.05.2011 18:39, schrieb Jim Jagielski:
+1
On May 20, 2011, at 1:17 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
i think the vote is over after final release :-)
[harry@srv-rhsoft:~]$ rpm -qa | grep httpd
httpd-2.2.19-2.fc14.rh.20110521.x86_64
httpd-tools-2.2.19-2.fc14.rh.20110521.x86_64
Am 25.04.2011 20:30, schrieb Stefan Fritsch:
On Sunday 24 April 2011, Reindl Harald wrote:
this warnings are useless as long there is no hint where the
rule is defined - the host has 200 domains and somebody
did somewhere something wrong :-(
True. Fixed in trunk in r1096551
Thank you
this warnings are useless as long there is no hint where the
rule is defined - the host has 200 domains and somebody
did somewhere something wrong :-(
it is normal to use a central error-log becuase nobody can look
in hundrets of them each day
[Sun Apr 24 18:09:25 2011] [warn] RewriteCond:
Am 15.04.2011 23:01, schrieb Jeff Trawick:
FastCGI is a way to get us out of all sorts of dark alleys; let's be
sure to keep it in mind as one of the tools to address binary
compatibility issues, PHP-centered or not
but you can not use .htaccess with cgi
what is the main reason using
, Reindl Harald
the lounge interactive design GmbH
A-1060 Vienna, Hofmühlgasse 17
CTO / software-development / cms-solutions
p: +43 (1) 595 3999 33, m: +43 (676) 40 221 40
icq: 154546673, http://www.thelounge.net/
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
201 - 284 of 284 matches
Mail list logo
