Hi,
I had just killed off my apache2 and tried to restart it when the
following kept apache running at ~100% cpu usage, trying to create the
file but failing. Attaching a strace resulted in an endless loop of:
stat64("/var/run/apache2/ssl_scache", 0xb8a0) = -1 ENOENT (No such
file or director
On Wed, 2004-12-22 at 15:44 +0100, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> * Ben Laurie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > There's a well-known solution to this issue: STARTTLS. When you've
> > written the RFCs and persuaded everyone to adopt them, let us know.
> I dont think that current http can be extended t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Joshua Slive [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Jeroen Massar wrote:
> > Requiring a "IKnowIAmOperatingAOpenProxy" flag that needs to
> > be set explicitly would be a better idea then :)
>
> That's w
even try to limit it to defaultly allowing only
the proxying of port 80 and 443 and denying the rest for instance.
Greets,
Jeroen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: Unfix PGP for Outlook Alpha 13 Int.
Comment: Jeroen Massar / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / http://unfix.org/~jeroen/
i
André Malo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> * Joshua Slive wrote:
>
> [spam via proxy]
> > One possible thing we could do is simply remove the sample
> proxy config
> > from our default httpd.conf. These samples make it too
> easy for people to
> > activate a proxy without securing it proper
Sander Striker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
First, congrats with 2.0.44 ;)
> *) Introduce the EnableSendfile directive, allowing users of NFS
> shares to disable sendfile mechanics when they either fail
> outright or provide intermitantly corrupted data. PR
> [William Rowe]
S
Colm MacCárthaigh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 12:58:48PM +, Colm MacCárthaigh wrote:
> > I'm using vanilla 2.4.18, from Debian kernel-source-2.4.18
> , one machine
> > has the broadcom bcm5700 module, and the the other has the intel
> > e1000 module.
>
> O.k.
Colm MacCarthaigh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 02, 2002 at 02:48:53PM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> > Colm MacCarthaigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > Linux (2.4.18 and 2.4.19, for me anyway) with apache versions
> > > 2.0.40 to 2.0.43 (that I've tested anyways) is broken
Joshua Slive [mailto:joshua@;slive.ca] wrote:
> Pier Fumagalli wrote:
>
> > I looked into it back in the days, but the only way would
> > be to go down to
> > RIPE (IANA in the US) to see where that IP is coming from,
> > doing some
> > weirdo
> > WHOIS parsing and stuff... _WAY_ overkilling...
Sander Striker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> We have also included support for IPv6 on any
> platform that supports IPv6.
Hmmm Windows NT/2k/XP/.Net/98/95 supports IPv6, now where is the IPv6
capable binary (or source for that matter ;) ?
(Btw... Mac OS X sports IPv6 also in beta's and pu
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> Opinions - not on what happens to day in 1.3 but what should
> happen in a
> perfect world:
>
> Given a config like this:
>
>
> AuthTypebasic
> AuthNameRestricted area
>
>
> What should happen ? Al
Günter Knauf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> unfortunately we have symlinks only on *nix platforms, so for
> all other platforms this isnt a solution...
> Guenter.
Unices all? have symlinks and NT supports lins too.
Then still people could instead of symlinking the data copy the configs
in a
Günter Knauf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > Ahhh, but you forget that not everyone uses DSO modules.
> Many people
> > compile the modules into the server, and for them the
> module is active
> > regardless of the LoadModule line.
> Ok, that was the point I missed and convinces me that i
Jeff Trawick wrote:
> Who would be in favor of this, or parts thereof? I'm anxious to see a
> consensus so that steps toward the goal can be filled in over time.
>
> 1) httpd can't be used directly on Unix because of environment
>variable settings
Due to inheritance (export) of environmen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Idea: On handling a file, setuid() to owner of file. On closing
connection,
> re-engage original uid (nobody, apache, www-data, whatever it is). PHP
will
> run under user's UID, other users are save.
The 'solution' is the perchild MPM ;)
Or a dirty hack; run apache as
On 19 Feb 2002, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> Jeroen Massar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > > Unless someone submitted patches since the 2.0.32-alpha tarball last
> > > > week. I don't think Win32/nt works especially as it relies on
> > > > so
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> > On Sun, 17 Feb 2002, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> >
> >
> > Unless someone submitted patches since the 2.0.32-alpha tarball last
> > week. I don't think Win32/nt works especially as it relies on
> > sockaddr_in for the mpm_winnt. I figured and fixed
On Sun, 17 Feb 2002, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>
> Apache 2.0 offers numerous enhancements, improvements and performance
> boosts over the 1.3 codebase. The most visible and noteworthy addition
> is the ability to run Apache in a hybrid thread/process mode on any
> platform that supports both
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> From testing on Windows, I am +1 for beta.
First I noticed that the KEYS file is missing from the tar file.
Second perchild doesn't compile, but see attached mpm_perchild.patch for the fix ;)
It basically does a int num_sockets and add the POD defini
I compiled a 20020213 httpd anoncvs today to try the perchild module.
And I think that:
8<-
Out of Memory: Killed process 4768 (apache2).
Out of Memory: Killed process 4774 (apache2).
Out of Memory: Killed process 4775 (apache2).
Out of Memory: Killed
Boo,
First I'll twack myself for the fact that I didn't look at the openssl
version any sooner...
This is prolly at least one nice for the archives for other donkeys
hitting their heads against this brick...
I wanted a newer version than the 2.0.16 beta's to experiment some more
with Apache 2.0
21 matches
Mail list logo
