On 21 Jun 2002, Sean M Alderman wrote: > Thanks for the clarification John and Milt, I appreciate it. I am > kind of curious though about the configuration of index.jsp on the > apache side of things.... > > If I use a JkMount /*.jsp ajp13 directive will any jsp file in the > Apache DocumentRoot be handled by Tomcat? Or does this just mean > that any jsp file in $TOMCAT_HOME/webapps will be handled by tomcat?
Well, the mod_jk documentation (and source) refers to the first argument to JkMount as "a URL prefix". This suggests that it's the first piece of the URL (after any server:port info). The first thing to note is that it's referring to something in the URL-space, not in the file-space. So I think it's confusing to ask what files (in the file-space) it's saying will be handled by Tomcat. Rather, I'd think in terms of what URL's it's saying should be handled by Tomcat, and what files those URL's will be mapped to. That is, what files Tomcat will look for. Anyway, by all this, I'd say it's neither of what you suggest above. Rather, I'd say it's to map all jsp files in Tomcat's ROOT (i.e. default) context (modified by whatever servlet-mapping's are in the ROOT context's web.xml file -- that's the other complication). Anyway, this can easily be verified (if you have a working mod_jk, which I don't yet; but as soon as I do, I'll try it :-). > I'm assuming that JkMount / ajp13 means that / is relative to > $TOMCAT_HOME/webapps, but I've found that I actually have to specify > the subdirectories under $TOMCAT_HOME/webapps in order to have > access to them. Well, again, think URL-space. I think this essentially tells Apache to have Tomcat handle everything (although I'm a bit unclear on the distinction between "/" and "/*"). But then that would suggest you wouldn't need to specify separate JkMount's for the subdirectories (i.e. contexts), so my understanding can't be 100% correct. Maybe there's some interaction here with how Tomcat determines the context. > I guess my general confusion here is that it seems like the JkMount > directive allows one to "overlay" parts/pieces of the > $TOMCAT_HOME/webapps directory over top of the Apache DocumentRoot. > Kind of analogous to creating a directory structure on a filesystem > (e.g. /home) then mounting a new filesystem as /home and being able > to see files from both at the same time (of course that's not the > way it work). That's what it sounds like JkMount does. Well, again, I'd say think URL-space. JkMount's don't really have anything to do with file-space, they just say how URL's should be handled. So if it says some URL should be handled by Tomcat, any corresponding location in Apache's file-space would be blocked/unreachable. For example, suppose under Apache's DocumentRoot there is a subdirectory examples with a file index.html in it. If you refernce the URL http://www.domain.com/examples/index.html it will lead to that file. But if you have the following JkMount directive JkMount /examples ajp13 and/or JkMount /examples/* ajp13 (again, I'm not quite sure of the distinction -- and if anyone has more to say about it, I'd appreciate it) then the URL http://www.domain.com/examples/index.html will lead to the index.html file in the context examples under Tomcat, and the aforementioned directory/file under Apache's DocumentRoot will be blocked/unreachable. Again, you should be able to verify this pretty easuly. > On Fri, 2002-06-21 at 08:49, Turner, John wrote: > > > > Thanks for the reply, I think. > > > > The configurations I have have been working since tomcat 3.1. They work on > > tomcat 4 with mod_jk. I see no reason to change them, especially > > considering the amount of time I wasted trying to get mod_webapp to work, > > and the amount of posts to this list from people having problems when > > changing their configuration to something new. > > > > The JkMount directives may be redundant, I'm not worried about it. They > > work. > > > > John Turner > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://www.aas.com > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Milt Epstein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 6:56 PM > > To: Tomcat Users List > > Subject: RE: Using JkMount with mod_jk question... > > > > > > On Thu, 20 Jun 2002, Turner, John wrote: > > > > > Good questions, all. It doesn't matter to me if "servlet" shows up > > > in the URL (it matters to some people/projects) so I haven't worried > > > about it. I think using "servlet" is just a convention...in my > > > projects, I usually prepend the application name to it. For > > > example, if the application is XYZ, then I use XYZServlet to denote > > > that application's servlet directory, not "servlet". Same goes for > > > company names...if you have company ABC using a particular app, you > > > might say "ABCServlet". > > > > Maybe I can add a little here. A long time ago in a galaxy far away, > > servlets used to be called with URL's like > > "http://www.domain.com/servlet/ServletName";, where ServletName was the > > actual name of the servlet class. "servlet/" was a virtual directory > > that told the servlet container (servlet engine back then) to find the > > named servlet. Of course, the web server had to be told to pass URL's > > with "servlet/" in them to the servlet container. > > > > That was before they came up with the idea of defining servlets in the > > web.xml file, and specifying servlet-mapping's to allow url-pattern's > > to point to these defined servlets. Then you could define a servlet > > dothis that was actually ServletName, and with the appropriate > > mappings, you could use a URL like "http://www.domain.com/dothis";. > > > > Now, I don't recall what the spec has to say about this, that is, > > whether it requires/allows/disallows using the old style URL's with > > "servlet/" and the actual servlet class name. But some people think > > it's a good idea not to use them, in fact, even to disable it, such > > that you can only reach servlets that have been defined in web.xml. > > In some ways, it allows more control and greater security. > > > > Anyway, the > > > > JkMount /servlet ajp13 > > > > in the examples is a vestige of all this. > > > > > > > I think, if you tell apache that "index.jsp" is a valid starting > > > page, you can just call "/mydir" instead of "/mydir/" and have that > > > JSP page redirect wherever you want. > > > > Wouldn't specifying index.jps as a welcome-file in web.xml be a better > > way of doing this? [ ... ] Milt Epstein Research Programmer Systems and Technology Services (STS) Campus Information Technologies and Educational Services (CITES) University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
