Hello Ben and others
On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 12:52 AM, Ben Noordhuis i...@bnoordhuis.nl wrote:
On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 00:15, Alexander Farber
the conn_config solution is most portable across Apache versions.
And what do you mean by core_module
in my case (source code below)?
That's the
On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 12:55:05PM +0200, r...@tuxteam.de wrote:
On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 11:22:20AM +0100, Nick Kew wrote:
On 23 Oct 2010, at 11:06, r...@tuxteam.de wrote:
Hello list,
I'm currently developing an output filter that , dpending on some
condition either
On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 10:13, Alexander Farber
alexander.far...@gmail.com wrote:
I wonder why my mod_perl module works and the C one not.
Your connection handler should return DECLINED for vhosts it doesn't
handle (I wager mod_perl did this for you).
You can get the vhost with conn-base_server
Hello Ben,
On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 2:08 PM, Ben Noordhuis i...@bnoordhuis.nl wrote:
On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 10:13, Alexander Farber
alexander.far...@gmail.com wrote:
Your connection handler should return DECLINED for vhosts it doesn't
handle (I wager mod_perl did this for you).
You can get
Alexander, take a look at mod_echo.c (included in the source tarball).
It's a great example of how a protocol handler should work and it just
might convince you to use bucket brigades after all. :)
You need to check if your handler is enabled for the current vhost. If
it's not, return DECLINED.
No, SetHandler should be ok, because mod_echo works fine.
I've added the port number to my logs:
ap_log_error(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_NOTICE, 0, conn-base_server,
served socket policy to %s via %d,
conn-remote_ip, conn-base_server-port);
And now I see in the error_log:
On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 00:00, Alexander Farber
alexander.far...@gmail.com wrote:
I've created a module using bb (the source code at the bottom)
and it suffers from the same problem (hijacks the port 80 too).
Could it be that SetHandler is a wrong directive for protocol handler?
The wrong
