* Denise Mangano [EMAIL PROTECTED] [1236 09:36]:
I do have appropriate permissions, as I have been able to stop it before.
There is no error message being logged when I try to stop it.
I ran ps -A which listed all processes. httpd (apache) was not one of them.
I am assuming PID means Port
isn't.
HTH
John
-Original Message-
From: Denise Mangano [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 7:09 PM
To: 'Tomcat Users List '
Subject: RE: Almost there...Updated Apach-Tomcat with mod_jk .. please
he lp!
Sorry, meant to respond to that before... I am
5:44 PM
Subject: RE: Almost there...Updated Apach-Tomcat with mod_jk .. please he
lp!
On Sun, 15 Dec 2002, Denise Mangano wrote:
Sorry, I thought I posted the exact message I was getting. It says
[Sun Dec 15 00:42:27 2002] [crit] (98)Address already in use:
make_sock: could not bind
On Sun, 15 Dec 2002, Rafael Angarita wrote:
I ran ps -A which listed all processes. httpd (apache) was not one of
them.
I am assuming PID means Port ID(?), and neither 443 nor 80 was listed...
This is all very strange and I am starting to sense that I will have to
reinstall Apache...
-Original Message-
From: Milt Epstein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 11:37 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: RE: Almost there...Updated Apach-Tomcat with mod_jk .. please he
lp!
On Sun, 15 Dec 2002, Denise Mangano wrote:
I do have appropriate permissions, as I
Typically this information is only available for a
user with root rights.
-Original Message-
From: Milt Epstein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 5:40 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Almost there...Updated Apach-Tomcat with mod_jk .. please
he lp
AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: RE: Almost there...Updated Apach-Tomcat with mod_jk .. please he
lp!
On Sun, 15 Dec 2002, Denise Mangano wrote:
I do have appropriate permissions, as I have been able to stop it
before. There is no error message being logged when I try to stop it.
I
938
-Original Message-
From: Jacob Kjome
To: Tomcat Users List
Sent: 12/15/2002 12:00 PM
Subject: RE: Almost there...Updated Apach-Tomcat with mod_jk .. please he
lp!
1. Tomcat is so non-intrusive that it is pretty certainly *not* causing
Apache not to work.
2. jk2.properties has
At 03:38 PM 12/15/2002 -0500, you wrote:
Jake,
Thanks for supplying me with that info. I will certainly refer to it, when
I set up Tomcat again. However, first I need to get Apache back up and
running. I know this is slightly off topic, but can you tell me how to
check what else is trying
there...Updated Apach-Tomcat with mod_jk .. please he
lp!
At 03:38 PM 12/15/2002 -0500, you wrote:
Jake,
Thanks for supplying me with that info. I will certainly refer to it,
when
I set up Tomcat again. However, first I need to get Apache back up and
running. I know this is slightly off topic
that?
-Original Message-
From: micael
To: Tomcat Users List
Sent: 12/15/2002 3:59 PM
Subject: RE: Almost there...Updated Apach-Tomcat with mod_jk .. please he
lp!
At 03:38 PM 12/15/2002 -0500, you wrote:
Jake,
Thanks for supplying me with that info. I will certainly refer to it,
when
I
very strange and I am starting to sense that I will have to
reinstall Apache...
-Original Message-
From: Milt Epstein
To: Tomcat Users List
Sent: 12/15/2002 5:44 PM
Subject: RE: Almost there...Updated Apach-Tomcat with mod_jk .. please he
lp!
On Sun, 15 Dec 2002, Denise Mangano wrote
I ran ps -A which listed all processes. httpd (apache) was not one of
them.
I am assuming PID means Port ID(?), and neither 443 nor 80 was listed...
This is all very strange and I am starting to sense that I will have to
reinstall Apache...
PID is process id.
Denise, if you are under
there...Updated Apach-Tomcat with mod_jk .. please he
lp!
I ran ps -A which listed all processes. httpd (apache) was not one of
them.
I am assuming PID means Port ID(?), and neither 443 nor 80 was
listed...
This is all very strange and I am starting to sense that I will have
to
reinstall
14 matches
Mail list logo
