At one time, this was a problem with suexec as well. Does it remain
a problem on that platform?
I have no problem, seeing the issue, with writing the fix later tonight
for 2.0.31-dev/1.3.23-dev. The bigger issue, did we ever fix for suexec
as well? The lingering pain was with spaces in the
At 10:29 AM 3/7/2002, you wrote:
On Thu, 7 Mar 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Therefore, I would think the problem must rather be that inside the Apache
docs all hyperlinks explicitly use the .html extension.
And if so, then only additional extensions _after_ this strings can still
be
Not acked. Would anyone care to reread the notes at /dist/httpd/ and
/dist/httpd/binaries/win32/ and see if they can figure out how someone
fails to get from 'here' to 'there'? As I just revised 'em, apparently my
reasoning was incomplete. Another set of eyes would be great.
At 09:57 AM
At 10:50 AM 5/10/2002, you wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Not acked. Would anyone care to reread the notes at /dist/httpd/ and
/dist/httpd/binaries/win32/ and see if they can figure out how someone
fails to get from 'here' to 'there'? As I just revised 'em, apparently my
reasoning
Just another plea for peer review, this time in Catalan.
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9065
typos and errors in it worked! welcome page in Catalan language
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2002-05-15 17:24 ---
Could you please do us a favor and find
It's more detailed than that. Here is a posit from a docco fan,
would you mind incorporating any interesting or useful bits?
My plate overflows.
Bill
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 27, 2002 2:50 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
At 12:22 PM 8/25/2002, you wrote:
The documentation says: ISAPIReadAheadBuffer defaults to 49152 bytes,
wich is exactly 48 kb. But the module actually uses a default of 48192
bytes. This seems to be a typo. Instead of changing the documentation I
attached a patch for mod_isapi.c to set the
At 12:25 PM 9/6/2002, Rich Bowen wrote:
On Fri, 6 Sep 2002, Joshua Slive wrote:
Congrats to everyone who worked on it. I think it looks very nice.
This looks really great, people.
++1 ... this is terrific!
Nit:
how about two more little nits...
'Description' in the directive should be the same
At 06:58 PM 9/6/2002, Luiz Rocha wrote:
On Saturday September 7 2002 01:41, André Malo wrote:
1. Why not wipe-out all the underlines? They certainly don't do any
good on paper and they do make the reading harder.
That's probably true :-)
On the other hand, the underline states that there
' for auth docs at the branch point.
Without this message, my reply to Sander next one makes no sense...
Bill
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2002 15:07:26 -0600
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
From: William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ok, after long debate on list, resistance from some quarters, and much
support from
At 07:49 AM 11/8/2002, Sander wrote:
I wouldn't mind taking on the RM job for 2.0.44.
And I won't mind giving it away :-)
However, prepare to lay down the tag Monday and start working
with both the dev and docs lists to gather as much of the docs work
into 2.0.44 as we can (under a 2_0_44_PRE1
For those interested (expecially committers), this is how I picture
cvs usage changing; I'm going to take the 'simple example' where
we presume most docs efforts are committed back to the 2.0 branch
from our development tree. And we will presume most folks work on
docs within the 2.1-dev tree
At 08:07 PM 11/9/2002, André Malo wrote:
the attached documents introduce explicit documentation of mod_dav_fs.
any comments and/or suggestions before committing?
DavLockDB is actually defined in mod_dav_fs, but I left a reference in
mod_dav. Is this correct or rather confusing for the user?
win_foo is somewhat stale. All win*.html need updating. Perhaps
something to attack tommorow aftn at the hackathon (especially
if it's possible to brain-dump to a docco enthusiast :-)
Bill
At 07:53 PM 11/16/2002, Joshua Slive wrote:
I was trying to address
At 07:32 AM 11/26/2002, Francis Daly wrote:
I'm not sure if this should go to dev or docs, but I'll try here as I
suspect that it is due to a recent change by someone here. Sorry if
I've got this bit wrong.
I'm cc'ing docs
The web page returned from http://httpd.apache.org/dev/ looks
strangely
At 11:19 AM 11/26/2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
That's my doing, certainly. Docs folks, would someone do the 'regen'
magic to the xdocs/dev/ sources to regenerate docs/dev/ ? I brought
the xdocs up to date yesterday after Justin pointed it out.
Thanks to Andre for taking this!
Bill
At 08:36 AM 12/6/2002, Iikka Meriläinen wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi!
Here's a draft version of the rewritten windows.xml. This patch is against
windows.xml, but the contents here are combined from windows.xml and
win_service.xml.
I've updated the information and
I've tossed a patch, apache_2.0.44-win9x-x86-apr-patch.zip, already confirmed
good, in http://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/binaries/win32/ to resolve this bug;
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16288
The patch contains one file, bin/libapr.dll. Only one change to that binary,
At 09:16 AM 1/22/2003, Joshua Slive wrote:
I'm working on this now.
Thanks Joshua!
Bill
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
An answer to a user question (and a gripe from me since I've hit this
problem myself on apache.org);
[the links] point to .tar.gz files, which exist. When they are clicked on,
however, they are being renamed to .tar.tar files. Any ideas?
Renamed by the browser, not the server.
Check in
.
Since everyone else ignores such a bogus header, it should be
a mostly harmless hack.)
One such thread on the Content-Disposition topic;
http://ftp.ics.uci.edu/pub/ietf/http/hypermail/1996q4/0048.html
Bill
At 12:20 PM 2/4/2003, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
An answer to a user question
At 09:07 PM 2/6/2003, kajaa wrote:
In the Apache distribute releases, there are many translations including
Japanese, Korean, and even Traditional Chinese, but no Simplified Chinese,
which is used by more than 1.3 billion peoples in the world, while
Traditional Chinese is used in some areas by
At 03:22 PM 2/18/2003, Justin Luster wrote:
I wasted about an hour before I realized that I needed the line:
ScriptInterpreterSource registry
in my configuration file. After that things worked fine.
Could this line be added to the configuration file commented out? This sure
would be helpful
I'd just like to point out that wading through hundreds of CLOSED reports
is a PITA for those of us who track Bugzilla incidents through email.
...a PITA only surpassed by some enterprising contributor who is willing
to wade through the reports and CLOSE those that are truly done and gone.
At 08:49 PM 3/19/2003, Joshua Slive wrote:
On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, Paul Smith wrote:
In fact, it DOES restrict access to that folder, BUT it does NOT restrict
access to 'mysite.co.uk/Admin/...' This would be fine on Unix file
systems,
but not on Windows ones, where /admin/ and /Admin/
At 11:27 AM 3/20/2003, Henk P. Penning wrote:
From: Thom May [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Does anyone have any objections to me removing the encoding for *.gz*
encoding everywhere under /dist?
.. and/or add
AddType text/plain .md5 .asc
in 'dist/.htaccess' ??
Thom wasn't asking about the
Thom,
all of the .html files are created from the xml sources. Simply take
the last .xml file and use diff to compare the changes between the older
version and your new one.
Realize it's alot faster for us to compare the add/change/deletes of
a document than to review the entire document
At 09:36 AM 3/24/2003, André Malo wrote:
* Joe Orton wrote:
On Mon, Mar 24, 2003 at 04:04:14PM +0100, André Malo wrote:
I've mailed the
db2man author asking about the license.
Thanks.
AIUI - we don't mind that tools are BSD, GPL, or otherwise freely licensed
as long as the results are
At 06:04 AM 4/10/2003, Ben Laurie wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
wrowe 2003/04/09 13:15:02
Modified:docs STATUS
Log:
Please consider and vote - see what this choice has done to us
r.e. .tar.gz.md5 files and so forth.
This seems totally wrong-headed to me. The problem
At 06:56 AM 5/23/2003, Eric wrote:
To summarize the POV:
a) we ship the HTML documentation together with releases (as we do today)
+1
b) additional documentation formats (CHM, PDF, etc.) are generated and
published independently from releases and don't come with the actual
distribution
Is there any value whatsoever in keeping this file in httpd-2.0-docs cvs?
It seems that we don't distribute any mechanism for generating the
required manual-index-data file. The win32 installer never installs
this file (nor does it create manual/search/ at all.)
Any thoughts? Do we begin
At 12:11 PM 7/17/2003, Joshua Slive wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Besides these containers, Apache 2.0 now supports the new Proxy container
(http://httpd.apache.org/docs-2.0/mod/mod_proxy.html#proxy).
So what about using mod_headers to edit HTTP headers of content that
not
be enabled for reverse proxy configurations.
Bill
At 05:30 PM 7/22/2003, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
The Security Team responded 13 minutes after Jason's initial report,
attempting to explain how he had misconfigured his server. While we
acknowledge that new directives might be desirable
At 04:20 PM 7/23/2003, Joshua Slive wrote:
Another thought on this issue:
Should we include
ProxyBlock :25
in our recommended configuration?
I haven't tested this, but it seems like it should be effective at
stopping the http-smtp gateway. And really, this type of gateway is a
bad idea, even on
Tetsuya,
This has come recently - from the perspective that the license may
not be enforceable in some jurisdictions without a native translation.
At some point translations might become necessary.
On the other hand, you are right, it is very controversial, in that one
minor issue in a single
At 10:30 AM 10/19/2003, Joshua Slive wrote:
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
http://cvs.apache.org/ shows that we have a *lot* of repositories that are
hard for
newcomers to sort through (and consume quite a bit of space) - if we
httpd'ers can
help mop up - I'm sure our
At 07:09 AM 11/10/2003, Andras Galos wrote:
Dear apache-fans,
I'm not sure I'm writing to the best place about contribution in the
documentation of the apache http server.
You found the best place :)
I've just dowloaded and installed Apache2 again and found the
internationalizable error pages
At 01:20 PM 11/22/2003, Rich Bowen wrote:
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unless anyone strenuously objects, I'm adding back the comments
regarding ScriptInterpreterSource. We're getting an increasing number
of
questions about this.
OK, thanks. All comments noted. I'll roll back
Our docco friends might want to know this, too - sorry I forgot to cc...
Bill
At 04:51 PM 11/26/2003, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
At 02:51 PM 11/26/2003, Christopher Jastram wrote:
I checked nagoya, there doesn't seem to be any way to submit bug reports (and
patches) for httpd2.1. Do I submit
At 11:16 AM 12/19/2003, Tony Finch wrote:
On Fri, Dec 19, 2003 at 10:04:15AM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
UseCanonicalName Off, Host: header provided (HTTP/1.1)
The host name header *excluding the host header port suffix * of the
request
is concatenated to httpd 1.3's Port
???
Well, I think you are asking a docs question so I'm forwarding there. But this
is nothing more than adding an appropriate LoadModule command, so it is
likely documented there.
Actually causing a loaded module (so, sl, dll or dylib) to actually do anything
productive would be the
All of the following seems stale... no?
Compile-Time Configuration Issues
Atomic Operations
The --enable-nonportable-atomics option is relevant for the following
platforms:
Solaris on SPARC
By default, APR uses mutex-based atomics on Solaris/SPARC. If you configure
with
Representing a huge palette of code pages - I'd recommend our docs
folk consider this and comment or commit.
Bill
At 10:59 AM 3/19/2004, Zvi Har'El wrote:
Dear Apache developers,
I sent the following three months ago, but since I got no response, and now
2.0.49 has been rolled without the
At 04:00 PM 5/4/2004, Joshua Slive wrote:
Try view-source. Your browser is trying to be way too smart for its own
good. (If I say text/plain, I MEAN text/plain!)
And if you ask IE to display text/plain, or binary/octet-stream,
the browser will laugh in your face and taunt you :)
The hint is
; filename=\test.txt\
is supported.
At 05:23 PM 5/4/2004, you wrote:
* William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The hint is to return a content-disposition header from http:, although
this is not an http: header, but a mime/smtp header. Or be certain
the downloaded file ends in .txt
At 10:21 AM 9/14/2004, Joshua Slive wrote:
On Tue, 14 Sep 2004, [ISO-8859-15] André Malo wrote:
A 30 KB default config, which nobody outside this circle here
really understands, isn't helpful - especially for beginners.
I agree that the current config file is too big and ugly. But let's be a
At 01:30 PM 9/14/2004, Joshua Slive wrote:
On Tue, 14 Sep 2004, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
I'm trying to understand what other anomalies you mean between
Unix and Win32, they aren't that dis-similar.
I was mainly refering to the big block of mpm-control directives near the top.
But I like
What about an auto-script for /docs/* that says (lets use the
example of /docs/mod/directives.html)
The httpd docs project team has split the information for your
convenience between the following versions, please indicate
which version you are using;
Apache httpd 1.3
At 05:32 PM 9/26/2004, Sander Striker wrote:
On Fri, 2004-09-17 at 07:57, Sander Striker wrote:
[...]
I fully intent to start on the 1.3
conversion tonight; this time without dropping the ball...
FWIW, I've got a full conversion of 1.2, 1.3 and 2.0 sitting
on my laptop. I have a question about
I've just shown the .txt flavor of .en and .de below... could someone
give me a readable version of the .de text (this was fished) and we
could also use a replacement .ja flavor (find the old .51 release text
over in www.apache.org/dist/httpd/Announcement2.txt.jp and .html.ja
At 10:13 AM
At 11:00 AM 9/27/2004, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
I've just shown the .txt flavor of .en and .de below... could someone
give me a readable version of the .de text (this was fished) and we
could also use a replacement .ja flavor (find the old .51 release text
over in www.apache.org/dist/httpd
At 02:55 PM 9/27/2004, Joshua Slive wrote:
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Comments anyone?
Seeing all +1's and no objections, I'm planning to push this out
in the next hour or two.
The ?update argument to download.cgi should be changed to the date/time that
you drop
At 04:49 PM 11/7/2004, André Malo wrote:
* Justin Erenkrantz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, but it's still the 2.1 branch with 2.1 docs (docs-2.1/). And, of course,
once tagged and released (as alpha, beta, whatever) it *is* public. Though not
stable. That's a difference :)
That's your issue
Obviously, httpd has quite a bit of documentation, but as some
current docs@ team members show, it can always continue improving.
If you are looking for projects with minimal or zero docs, I'd
encourage you to subscribe to general .at. incubator.apache.org.
Those projects are usually at the stage
At 07:05 AM 3/20/2005, Rich Bowen wrote:
A few of us discussed this on IRC, but I suppose we really should talk
about it on the mailing list, too.
The heart of the conversation was that there's no good reason for
Options Indexes to be on in /icons, and it could possibly be construed
to be an
At 09:15 AM 5/25/2005, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Does anyone ahve a better/stronger/faster way to say this?
Not quite yet...
+ limodulemod_dir/module uses a new, faster mechanism for
+ redirecting requests to a directory index. Modules such as
+ modulemod_rewrite/module are no longer
At 02:22 PM 5/25/2005, André Malo wrote:
* William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
At 09:15 AM 5/25/2005, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Does anyone ahve a better/stronger/faster way to say this?
What I'm wondering is; mod_dir still does not translate the page
until after the translate_name hook. Which specific
Additional word-smithing is welcome; I was interested in dropping
some of the anachronisms, and trying to reflect the foundation in
place of all the HTTP-centric focus of describing Apache.
We could still use a brief summary of why 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and of
course, why 2.0 exists. Possibly could make
Sorry, ignore httpd/site/trunk/xdocs/cli/mod/mod_aspdotnet.xml and
cli/index.xml - totally seperate commit that I had forgotten that
I had staged. [note to self; svn status is goodness]
Anyone who wants to join, it sure seems like it's time to update
the overall content; the stuff I'm touching
At 12:48 PM 7/19/2005, Joshua Slive wrote:
Erik Abele wrote:
The point of the cgi script is to provide not a redirect, but another page
(with status 300 so far), which points to all the different versions.
Ugh. Please just send the 2.x stuff directly where it belongs. There is
certainly no
At 05:24 AM 7/20/2005, Rich Bowen wrote:
Perhaps I'm missing what you mean by remapping /docs-1.3/. From what
to where?
from it's old /docs/ home to /docs-1.3/ ... I'm thinking that the
/docs/1.3/, /docs/2.0/ etc isn't that useful, as mentioned by other
posters.
Bill
At 04:08 PM 7/23/2005, André Malo wrote:
* William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
To disambiguate these requests, would you consider...
http://httpd.apache.org//directive
http://httpd.apache.org/query?directive
// is equeivalent to / in URLs
Nak!!! // is most definately a distinct location :)
You
At 04:53 AM 8/6/2005, André Malo wrote:
I'd consider query?directive not as that easy as it could be. Think of
the users that type them manually.
Yes, I'm thinking of manual entry; and i want something that is
clearly distinct from normal filesystem entries, for the sake of
various query,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]'ers...
As Paul mentions below, on Friday (probably 1 a.m. ;-) he will
tag 2.1.7. This is just a reminder to our most excellent doco
team that, once ack'ed - this becomes 2.1 beta, and then...
(drum roll please...) 2.2 GA(!)
So if you had changes to catch up with 2.1 that
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 11:53:43AM -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Paul Querna wrote:
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
This leaves the question about what to do with the trunk documentation.
Should http://httpd.apache.org/docs/trunk/ be made work perpetually
André Malo wrote:
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+docs:
+ @if test -d $(top_srcdir)/docs/manual/build; then \
+ cd $(top_srcdir)/docs/manual/build ./build.sh; \
+ else \
+ echo 'For details on generating the docs, please read:'; \
+ echo '
André Malo wrote:
* William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
What if './build.sh en' would build english only, while ./build.sh
defaulted to all (as most developers presume)?
Some time ago (one year or two) it was decided to let it default to en,
because most developers don't feel to be able to review
Paul Querna wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Folks,
should we restore the missing feature to actually help folks create
their first cert/key with a support/ .sh/.bat file to generate a key
and a cert?
No, I think we should give a URL to our online documentation that tells
you how
FYI... my favorite trick is to pre-touch the .key file with 600 perms,
so that the resulting, generated key is never, in it's lifetime, world
readable. (I'm also not a big fan of passphrases, thus a bit of extra
paranoia for good measure :-)
Bill
Thank you everyone for testing, especially the infrateam for picking
this up on Ajax and really stressing it under mod_mbox (in spite of
a few more fixes required to mbox's mime processing :)
Although the site is updated, starting the clock on the announce till
early tomorrow aftn (america time)
Joshua Slive wrote:
Just one caution: Although the docs-project tutorial listed above has
lots of good general information, almost all of the technical details
are outdated and incorrect.
This made me chuckle ...
Documentor, document thyself :)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+
+ pIf, for example, your configuration permits access to a resource by IP
+ address you should ensure that this content is not cached. You can do
this by
+ using the directive module=mod_cacheCacheDisable/directive
+ directive, or
Noirin Plunkett wrote:
It's just been pointed out on IRC that 2.0.55 is no longer the best
available version of Apache.
Rather than scrapping the 2.0.55 announcement entirely, here's a
proposed patch.
Your language looks good. Note that you can borrow the current language
of 1.3.34, of
Vincent de Lau wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the 2.1 line consists of alpha/beta release
for 2.2 and there is no public/stable 2.1 version.
2.1 is dead (it was abandoned as 2.2.0 was released)
2.odd will never be 'stable'. So right now, httpd trunk is 2.3, anticipating
the next major
ro so wrote:
Hello to Everybody:
I would like to set up a new Romanian Translation Project Web site at
http://www.apache2.info/ for Apache 2 branch (documentation and error
messages).
Please somebody let me know the procedure and requirements. Also, it
would be great to get in touch with
ro so wrote:
Thanks William:
A little harsh from you to say that www.apache2.info
The important thing is for you to ensure that such a site does -not- use
the feather without permission (rarely granted, fyi) and states that the
site is not affilated with the Apache Software Foundation
Alex Smith wrote:
In the Windows section of the 2.2.x documentation, the commands that it
gives are wrong. For example, it says to install Apache as a Windows
service you should run this from the bin directory:
apache -k install
The apache executable does not exist. The correct executable to
Rich Bowen wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Not to bring up a well-beaten dead horse, but ...
Is it yet time to make /docs redirect to /docs/2.2 rather than /docs/1.3
++1
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL
Joshua Slive wrote:
On 6/27/06, Noirin Plunkett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jun 27, 2006 at 09:48:56AM -0400, Joshua Slive wrote:
Any other solution would result in MANY broken links (due to changes
in doc structure, not to mention the fact that some people still
really do want to link
I notice the website doesn't have docs/2.3/ quite yet. If someone
had free cycles, it would be worthwhile to add, if we expect to bring
a 2.4 full-circle someday sooner (I was looking for Brad's doc changes
for Satisfy containers ;-)
Bill
André Malo wrote:
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
add docs/2.3 to the httpd-httpd.conf
Can someone please put that change productive? Thanks a lot!
Speaking of productive - thanks for all the help today with migrating
the old-style mod_aspdotnet.xml into our current conventions!!!
Much
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/trunk/faq/support.html
Mentions Check the error log (twice!)...
but it doesn't mention to check the system boot log, or windows event log
(system, then application level logs) for Apache httpd startup errors.
It seems this would make sense to mention here, no?
In the docs collection, we currently have;
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/debugging.html
At the casual-user level, I just documented how-to-backtrace a running
server using Dr. Watson on the user list, and the content seems to fit
here if someone would like to merge this note into the debugging
@@ServerRoot@@ doesn't guarantee that either :-/ grrr - please don't
start commit wars by reverting without some small post to discuss?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: slive
Date: Sun Jul 23 14:00:58 2006
New Revision: 424817
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=424817view=rev
Log:
Joshua Slive wrote:
On 7/27/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: bayard
Date: Thu Jul 27 10:30:48 2006
New Revision: 426159
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=426159view=rev
Log:
Removed the Modules Registry link from the Related Sites menu. Asking
around, it seems to be
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
At least obtaining the KEYS file via
http_s_://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/site/trunk/dist/KEYS?revision=494598
should increase the trust in the KEYS file and it contents (provided that
our repository has not been hacked).
His point - he loaded the KEYS file into
An OS-savy friend just tossed me an inquiry of 'why is Apache.exe running on
this PC?' Phrased just a bit more clearly than 'why did Apache take over my
computer?' but I trusted him to know the difference, so we started digging.
Apparently, NVIDIA's Forceware Network Access Manager installs
Added;
http://wiki.apache.org/httpd/Info/ThirdPartyBundled
which should let more users amend this list with their observations
and research.
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
An OS-savy friend just tossed me an inquiry of 'why is Apache.exe running on
this PC?' Phrased just a bit more clearly
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 03/29/2007 12:57 PM, Martin Kraemer wrote:
Together with the decision for .8 vs. .1, I suggest to adapt the
sbin/ vs. bin/ installation directories. Traditionally, these user
programs were installed in sbin/ too; but IMO binaries for general
interest should go to
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
Ok, I think you are right and they have mixed usage. Compiling a module
would be done by a user whereas installing it might be a task reserved to
root.
Would it make sense to move ap[ru]-1-config and apxs to build/?
AFA apxs is concerned; IMHO, no. The user wants to
Girish wrote:
Hi,
I have successfully installed the apache server on my linux machine.
Now when I do a http://ip address, I am getting the test page.
I need to change this test page to some other page which is around 5 MB.
Where can I do this change, so that when I do a http browse, I
Joshua Slive wrote:
Scream if you have objections.
nay - +1 to your suggestion
Sad really, but not maintained is worse than not having one at all.
Perhaps the wiki can be leveraged for a while to replace it.
-
To
We have a serious issue to determine, and I've asked for a 48 hour cooldown
of wiki.apache.org/httpd/ to make a decision, and in the meantime asked that
the wiki become read-only for the conclusion of this decision.
[ ] Our httpd wiki is open to external resources for httpd.
[ ] External
[for infra, who is bcc'ed - three * bullets below]
Joshua Slive wrote:
Although I respect Bill's desire to have this solved apache-wide, I
actually think that this case would have been better addressed in the
closer confines of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Let's just address this particular case
and
Joshua Slive wrote:
I think there is a clear and reasonable middle ground:
External links are encouraged where they add substantial value, but
you may not link to your own pages or otherwise seek private benefits
from external links.
This has been the unwritten rule in the apache httpd
Webmaster wrote:
Wow. I'm not willing to participate in a community that publically says
they don't want me. I really resent being treated like an outlaw or some
blackhat. Its shocking how different my view of Apache is now compared to
the previous 10 years.
10 years ago we were busy
Tony Stevenson wrote:
Afternoon,
Please find attached patched to the following files:
22Install.patch = /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/INSTALL
20Install.patch = /httpd/httpd/branches/2.0.x/INSTALL
TRInstall.patch = /httpd/httpd/trunk/INSTALL
Caught my radar ... notice that in 2.0.x we *do*
Rich Bowen wrote:
I will be *SO* glad when these directives finally go away.
Rename to AuthzWhitelist and AuthzBlacklist which is what they are
and how I've begun to explain them :)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What would folks say to renaming all occurances of reverse proxy
to say gateway in our documentation?
jean-frederic clere wrote:
I am not sure that is a good idea see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_proxy
read and contrast to
Webmaster wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Vincent Bray [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 6:18 AM
To: Webmaster
Cc: Francois Gingras; docs@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: Your HTTPD wiki page
If you'd made an attempt to provide some useful information
on
1 - 100 of 244 matches
Mail list logo
