Chuck Goehring wrote:
> To all,
>
>
>
> Having trouble configuring Apache 2.0 with mod_perl. Don't know if I
> need compat or not.
>
>
>
> My Apache 1.x/mod_perl 1.24 startup starts like this:
>
>
>
> use strict;
> use Apache ();
> use Apache::Registry;
> use Apache::DBI();
> use CG
Chuck Goehring wrote:
> Just posted minutes ago on this.
>
> This partially fixed me also. Problem was the line in the /perl container
> (PerlHandler Apache::Registry instead of PerlHandler ModPerl::Registry).
> Except now I get this:
> [Mon Apr 22 18:32:37 2002] [error] 1580: ModPerl::Registry
Just posted minutes ago on this.
This partially fixed me also. Problem was the line in the /perl container
(PerlHandler Apache::Registry instead of PerlHandler ModPerl::Registry).
Except now I get this:
[Mon Apr 22 18:32:37 2002] [error] 1580: ModPerl::Registry: `Can't call
method "args" on an
To all,
Having trouble configuring Apache 2.0 with
mod_perl. Don't know if I need compat or not.
My Apache 1.x/mod_perl 1.24 startup starts like
this:
use strict;use Apache ();use
Apache::Registry;use Apache::DBI();use CGI qw(-compile :cgi);use
Carp();
That didn't fly on Apache 2.0
Paolo,
Sorry, wrong URL. That URL is for 1.x Apache use. For 2.0 use 1.99 stuff
from http://cvs.apache.org/snapshots/modperl-2.0/. It has snapshots
(bleeding edge). This version compiled for me. Still trying to get it
configured, though.
Below was the original version Doug released. Othe
On Mon, 22 Apr 2002, xk wrote:
> Apache version info (shown on error web pages):
> Apache/2.0.35 (Win32) mod_perl/1.99_02-dev Perl/v5.6.1
>
> Is this mod_perl 1.0 or 2.0? When I installed (from the location you
> pointed - theoryx5) it said mod_perl 2.0, but on Apache is shows 1.99
This is norma
My configuration is now this:
PerlModule Apache2
PerlModule ModPerl::Registry
SetHandler perl-script
PerlHandler ModPerl::Registry
Options +ExecCGI
When I run a script through Apache, I get the following error in the log:
[error] failed to resolve handler `ModPerl::Registry'
I've
> Did you have an old version of mod_perl installed?
> The modules you are using seem to be from mod_perl 1, while you need the
> mod_perl 2 ones.
I seem to have installed an older version before 2.0, but I'm not sure.
In my /site/lib dir I have both Apache and Apache2 subdir. Is this ok?
And I'
Followup from last week:
> I'm using AuthCookie and as some of you know, if it determines your
> session to be invalid it redirects to a login page instead by way of a
> FORBIDDEN response coupled with a custom_response error page.
[snip]
>...I then thought it'd be neat to include on the logi
At 20:15 22.04.2002, xk wrote:
> > I assume this is for mod_perl-1?
>
>Apache version info (shown on error web pages):
>Apache/2.0.35 (Win32) mod_perl/1.99_02-dev Perl/v5.6.1
>
>Is this mod_perl 1.0 or 2.0? When I installed (from the location you
>pointed - theoryx5) it said mod_perl 2.0, but on A
At 20:35 22.04.2002, David LeBlanc wrote:
>If Apache::Registry depends on Apache to access the registry, I don't
>believe that Apache uses the registry anymore, at least for file
>associations. The old "change this setting to make apache look in the
>registry for file associations" stuff is gone f
xk wrote:
>>I assume this is for mod_perl-1?
>
>
> Apache version info (shown on error web pages):
> Apache/2.0.35 (Win32) mod_perl/1.99_02-dev Perl/v5.6.1
>
> Is this mod_perl 1.0 or 2.0? When I installed (from the location you
> pointed - theoryx5) it said mod_perl 2.0, but on Apache is shows
If Apache::Registry depends on Apache to access the registry, I don't
believe that Apache uses the registry anymore, at least for file
associations. The old "change this setting to make apache look in the
registry for file associations" stuff is gone from the Apache 2.0 conf file.
I find, that wi
> I assume this is for mod_perl-1?
Apache version info (shown on error web pages):
Apache/2.0.35 (Win32) mod_perl/1.99_02-dev Perl/v5.6.1
Is this mod_perl 1.0 or 2.0? When I installed (from the location you
pointed - theoryx5) it said mod_perl 2.0, but on Apache is shows 1.99
> Do you have a
>
On Mon, 22 Apr 2002, xk wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I'm getting the following mod_perl error when I try to run a perl script
> through Apache: [error] failed to resolve handler `Apache::Registry'
>
> My configuration is:
> -
> Alias /perl/ "C:/My Documents/HTML/xk Sound/perl/"
>
> #PerlModule A
> Here's what Geoffrey Young said, you seem to have missed it:
>
> > you can't use $s (the server record) to capture PerlSetVar that exist
> on a per-directory basis (within a or block). try
> > Apache->request->dir_config('BlaTest');
> >
> > instead. you should use $s->dir_config() fo
Ciao!
As has been pointed out in the past, the VERSION of a module does not
necessarily reveal the module's maturity or robustness. This is
particularly true for the RPC::XML module.
I am using it in two production environments, in both client and
modperl-enabled server modes with excellent re
At 12:52 22.04.2002, Sören Stuckenbrock wrote:
> >> Nope, using:
> >>
> >> Alias /contest /www/u-dev/contest
> >> PerlModule Apache::Registry
> >> PerlModule Apache::DBI
> >> PerlTaintCheck On
> >>
> >>SetHandler perl-script
> >>PerlHandler Apache::Registry
> >
> I think you'll find RPC::XML to be a solidly engineered module. I've
> used it as a client and as a server to good effect. It includes
> stand-alone, CGI, and mod_perl based servers and a very nice client.
I will second the vote for RPC::XML. We use this module with great
success under mod
Hi, Drew.
> I came across the very problem you're having. I use mod_bandwidth, its
> actively maintained, allows via IP, directory or any number of ways to
> monitor bandwidth usage http://www.cohprog.com/mod_bandwidth.html
The size of the data sent through the pipe doesn't reflect the CPU spent
Hi, Jeremy.
> I looked at the page you mentioned below. It wasn't really
> clear on the page, but what happens when the requests get above
> the max allowed? Are the remaining requests queued or are they
> simply given some kind of error message?
The service will respond with an HTTP 503 messa
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-22 09:53]:
> >> The fact is that developers in my team have Apache under /usr/local in
> >> Linux machines, but we would prefer to develop as normal users, not as
> >> www or nobody, though that will be the user in production.
>
> See the section o
>> The fact is that developers in my team have Apache under /usr/local in
>> Linux machines, but we would prefer to develop as normal users, not as
>> www or nobody, though that will be the user in production.
See the section on configuring Apache using sections
in the eagle book. I normally us
F. Xavier Noria wrote:
> The fact is that developers in my team have Apache under /usr/local in
> Linux machines, but we would prefer to develop as normal users, not as
> www or nobody, though that will be the user in production.
>
> What is the standard way to configure things for that? We have
Sören Stuckenbrock wrote:
>>>Nope, using:
>>>
>>>Alias /contest /www/u-dev/contest
>>>PerlModule Apache::Registry
>>>PerlModule Apache::DBI
>>>PerlTaintCheck On
>>>
>>> SetHandler perl-script
>>> PerlHandler Apache::Registry
>>> PerlSetVar BlaTest BlaVal
>>>
hi
i am trying to set up a front end vanilla + backend modperl
server with mod_proxy
the front end server (apache2)works ok on port 80, the back
end works (apache mod_perl 1) ok on port 8080, but
each time the url is redirected to the backend server i get a
forbidden response even though i put
>> Nope, using:
>>
>> Alias /contest /www/u-dev/contest
>> PerlModule Apache::Registry
>> PerlModule Apache::DBI
>> PerlTaintCheck On
>>
>>SetHandler perl-script
>>PerlHandler Apache::Registry
>>PerlSetVar BlaTest BlaVal
>>PerlRequire /www/u-dev
27 matches
Mail list logo