Hi,
> > On Wed, 29 Aug 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > VirtualHost 192.168.33.1:80
> >
> > ^ This Directive does not exist. Don't you get complaints from Apache
> > about it? (Should be NameVirtualHost for name based virtual hosting, or
> > omitted for IP-based virtual hosts)
>
> No, you're wrong.
>
> First, if you're running 192.168.33.1 as a NameVirtualHost, the entry for
> each name-based host on that address must be enclosed by
>
> <VirtualHost 192.168.33.1>
> </VirtualHost>
>
> and you use the ServerName and ServerAlias directives to identify the DNS
> for the particular site you're setting up.
>
> And if you want just one site on that IP, you don't need a NameVirtualHost
> directive. In that case,
>
> > > <VirtualHost 192.168.33.1:80>
> > > MidgardEngine On
> > > ServerName 192.168.33.1
> > > Port 80
> > > [...]
>
> is perfectly legal (and proper).
All true, but the original post said:
[...]
VirtualHost 192.168.33.1:80
<VirtualHost 192.168.33.1:80>
MidgardEngine On
ServerName 192.168.33.1
Port 80
[...]
, and the first VirtualHost, the one not enclosed in < > is the one I
referred to. That one is legal nor proper.
wkr,
--
Envida http://www.envida.net/
Armand A. Verstappen Graadt van Roggenweg 328
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 3531 AH Utrecht
tel: +31 (0)30 298 2255 Postbus 19127
fax: +31 (0)30 298 2111 3501 DC Utrecht
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
