Not to stir up this debate again, but I just remembered the #1 reason Apache
is better then IIS... Microsoft doesn't even let you run IIS on Windows XP
home, so those trying to learn web development on their stock Dell computer
are SOL unless they use Apache.
Russ
For 99.9% of people who would even use XP home...I don't think this would be
an issue. You are good at non-issues, eh Russ? ;-)
Eric
-Original Message-
From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, 25 January 2007 20:32
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Apache config
Not to stir up
config
For 99.9% of people who would even use XP home...I don't think this would
be
an issue. You are good at non-issues, eh Russ? ;-)
Eric
-Original Message-
From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, 25 January 2007 20:32
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Apache config
Sent: Tue Jan 23 01:40:38 2007
Subject: RE: Apache config
In any case, I think you're missing my point entirely, or are simply
unwilling to acknowledge it. I'll go ahead and restate it here, and then
I'm
done. For the purposes of most CF developers, who aren't server
administrators
Subject: RE: Apache config
You're probably right, and I should be more proactive in only
applying patches that apply to my configuration. I should
also probably be testing the patches on a development server
first. However, I would rather spend the time doing real
work than worrying about
-Original Message-
From: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) [mailto:Neil.Robertson-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 3:53 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Apache config
As Dave noted, as a matter of course you should have at least a Dev and
Testing environment. Ideally an R
-Original Message-
From: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) [mailto:Neil.Robertson-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 3:47 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Apache config
Re: IIS multiple domain tools, I am unsure how they are ugly workarounds?
I
mean, what is ugly about a one
-Original Message-
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 1:25 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Apache config
I don't have anything against learning new things, but I don't care at all
for the evangelism. If someone says Apache beats the pants
Dave Watts wrote:
However, for the 5-10 person development shop (which most
development companies are) this is not a practical solution.
It would cost more to set up the infrastructure for this then
it would to simply deal with the extremely rare patch
problems when they arise.
Most
PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2007 2:34 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Apache config
Why are you rebooting your Windows box when the patch doesn't require it?
Sounds like a user issue...not an OS issue :-D.
Eric
-Original Message-
From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent
Cause you are not overriding it.
-Original Message-
From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 22 January 2007 14:58
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Apache config
All my workstations and servers are set to received automatic updates, which
then reboot the pc if necessary. If most
Actually, IIS patches have been few and far between lately, and I'm sure
plenty of people are still looking for IIS vulnerabilities. But, I do
agree
that in general the open source world has been much better about
responding
to known security vulnerabilities. However, your point was that you
Testing the patches should be the MS's job, not ours.
Except Microsoft doesn't have access to YOUR specific environment, nor
can they possibly test every combination of software and hardware that
someone may be running.
Their test cases are necessarily going to be limited to their own
All my workstations and servers are set to received automatic
updates, which then reboot the pc if necessary. If most of
the updates, do not require reboots, then why have my PC's
been rebooting monthly like clockwork?
First, you really shouldn't apply automatic updates to production
You're probably right, and I should be more proactive in only
applying patches that apply to my configuration. I should
also probably be testing the patches on a development server
first. However, I would rather spend the time doing real
work than worrying about patches. Why can't
Dave Watts wrote:
You'll notice that this is an SES URL, on an IIS 6 server ...
I would argue that in fact that's not a search engine
friendly url at all. That url gives me no context for what
I'm going to find on the page if I follow the link.
Note the acronym: SES. Not SEF. The last S
I disagree. URI's fundamentally have a scheme that specifies
a transport mechanism (mailto, ftp, file, http, etc) followed
by an address. Its part of the spec.
No, it's not part of the spec. URNs (which are certainly URIs) often don't
tell you anything at all about transport or location.
Dave Watts wrote:
If you say that URLs are more properly called URIs, that's not semantic
hair-splitting, it's an error, in the same way that it would be an error to
tell someone they shouldn't say car or truck or bicycle, but should
instead say vehicle. When you use the term URL, you are
To: CF-Talk
Sent: Mon Jan 22 19:35:30 2007
Subject: Re: Apache config
Dave Watts wrote:
If you say that URLs are more properly called URIs, that's not semantic
hair-splitting, it's an error, in the same way that it would be an error
to
tell someone they shouldn't say car or truck or bicycle
Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) wrote:
I always thought URLs were different than URIs
W3C work on Addressing schemes: http://www.w3.org/Addressing
And in particular, URIs, URLs, and URNs: Clarifications and
Recommendations: http://www.w3.org/TR/uri-clarification/
Judah
My point in the last email was simply that the bodies that
set up web-related standards call URLs URIs.
That is certainly the case. However, those bodies are generally discussing
things that apply to all URIs, not just HTTP URIs. There has been no formal
deprecation of the term URL, according
Dave Watts wrote:
Now, a reasonable reading of any of that doesn't lead me to the conclusion
that if I say URL, you'd be right to correct me by saying, no, URI. And
that's essentially what you did in your original response. You said that
URLs are more properly called URIs. You didn't provide
You're probably right, and I should be more proactive in only
applying patches that apply to my configuration. I should
also probably be testing the patches on a development server
first. However, I would rather spend the time doing real
work than worrying about patches. Why can't
-Original Message-
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 11:46 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Apache config
All my workstations and servers are set to received automatic
updates, which then reboot the pc if necessary. If most of
the updates
I did say more correctly and you seem to have latched on
to this for some reason. I did not use the phrase in an
attempt to imply that it was incorrect to use URL nor to
imply that I was making a critical distinction between the
two.
This is the crux of my disagreement. I latched on to
I do enjoy troubleshooting under pressure, and as I've never
had a bad patch, I would rather my patches be installed ASAP.
If I were to wait until I have time to sit down and test the
patch (which still doesn't guarantee that it will break
production, since the configuration of the test
I don't know about Solaris, but on Linux, patches get
installed nightly through up2date or yum on Redhat, and I've
never had anything break because of it (nor do I know of
anyone else who has). The process also NEVER needs a reboot.
That's good for you, but a simple Google search will
As I don't know how your PC's are set up...I couldn't tell you.
Eric
-Original Message-
From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, 22 January 2007 08:58
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Apache config
All my workstations and servers are set to received automatic updates, which
In any case, I think you're missing my point entirely, or are simply
unwilling to acknowledge it. I'll go ahead and restate it here, and then
I'm
done. For the purposes of most CF developers, who aren't server
administrators, there is no substantive difference between IIS and Apache
-
I didn't start this thread, but I feel the need to respond here.
Dave Watts wrote:
I don't know about Solaris, but on Linux, patches get
installed nightly through up2date or yum on Redhat, and I've
never had anything break because of it (nor do I know of
anyone else who has). The process also
However, for the 5-10 person development shop (which most
development companies are) this is not a practical solution.
It would cost more to set up the infrastructure for this then
it would to simply deal with the extremely rare patch
problems when they arise.
Most development shops may
-
From: Judah McAuley
To: CF-Talk
Sent: Sun Jan 21 00:57:59 2007
Subject: Re: Apache config
Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) wrote:
Well, your URL is simple a rewrite of index.cfm?foo=foo, it is not a
permanent location for this document in that if I bookmark this page and
you
delete foo, I
at http://www.reedexpo.com
-Original Message-
From: Russ
To: CF-Talk
Sent: Sun Jan 21 06:05:13 2007
Subject: RE: Apache config
-Original Message-
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2007 3:25 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Apache config
snip
wish they had an IIS port for Linux. It would have saved me a lot
of time and frustration...that's for sure.
Eric
-Original Message-
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 19 January 2007 19:04
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Apache config
Apache beats the pants off IIS
2007 19:22
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Apache config
I completely disagree with that statement. Ease of use has (nearly) nothing
to do with how good or bad a particular product is. Some people have spent
years running their sites on Apache and the same holds true for others using
IIS. It all depends what
: Cutter (CFRelated) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 19 January 2007 20:50
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Apache config (solved)
Seems I had my page cached. I bring it up now (with that config) and all is
well. Just a fluke (I never turn on caching...) Thanks to everyone for their
help.
Dave, I have
See below
-Original Message-
From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 19 January 2007 22:42
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Apache config
-Original Message-
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 9:29 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Apache
January 2007 08:05
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Apache config
The only thing I don't like about Apache are the mod extras and getting
them to work (if they do not work out of the box), if you are
unfamiliar with compiling etc you can get stuck in a rut trying to get
it to work (when binaries
Why are you rebooting your Windows box when the patch doesn't require it?
Sounds like a user issue...not an OS issue :-D.
Eric
-Original Message-
From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, 21 January 2007 00:05
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Apache config
-Original Message
You'll notice that this is an SES URL, on an IIS 6 server ...
I would argue that in fact that's not a search engine
friendly url at all. That url gives me no context for what
I'm going to find on the page if I follow the link.
Note the acronym: SES. Not SEF. The last S stands for safe.
I am not an Apache committer, and I would not be qualified to
be one. I do know that there are thousands of eyes looking
at the Apache source and finding bugs and vulnerabilities. I
do upgrade my Apache versions from time to time, and I do it
more often if a serious vulnerability is
Dave Watts wrote:
Apache beats the pants off IIS, but it has a bit of a learning curve.
troll
One important measurement of how good a product is, is how easy it is to
learn and use.
/troll
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
Apache *is* easy to use - you
08:37:33 2007
Subject: Re: Apache config
Dave Watts wrote:
Apache beats the pants off IIS, but it has a bit of a learning curve.
troll
One important measurement of how good a product is, is how easy it is to
learn and use.
/troll
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http
Subject: Re: Apache config (solved)
Seems I had my page cached. I bring it up now (with that config) and all
is well. Just a fluke (I never turn on caching...) Thanks to everyone
for their help.
Dave, I have to disagree to a point. Ease of use isn't the question,
really, it's 'What is the best tool
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://people.apache.org/~rbowen/presentations/apacheconEU2005/hate_apa
che.p
df
That is a classic!
~|
Upgrade to Adobe ColdFusion MX7
Experience Flex 2 MX7 integration create
The only thing I don't like about Apache are the mod extras and getting them
to work (if they do not work out of the box), if you are unfamiliar with
compiling etc you can get stuck in a rut trying to get it to work (when
binaries are not available). The .config file is very flexible but a GUI
ApacheConf, which is shareware
Larry Lyons wrote:
The only thing I don't like about Apache are the mod extras and getting them
to work (if they do not work out of the box), if you are unfamiliar with
compiling etc you can get stuck in a rut trying to get it to work (when
binaries are not
Apache lets you keep the .conf file in a source control
system like subversion. It lets you easily copy and paste
and create new configurations. I can set up a template for
new virtual sites and have CF automatically create a new conf
file, and do a graceful restart on apache and voila,
: Dave Watts
To: CF-Talk
Sent: Sat Jan 20 20:25:27 2007
Subject: RE: Apache config
Apache lets you keep the .conf file in a source control
system like subversion. It lets you easily copy and paste
and create new configurations. I can set up a template for
new virtual sites and have CF
ApacheConf, which is shareware
Larry Lyons wrote:
Thanks Cutter I appreciate it. Now to dump IIS off my home server.
larry
~|
Upgrade to Adobe ColdFusion MX7
Experience Flex 2 MX7 integration create powerful cross-platform
Dave Watts wrote:
snip
Well, if you're using CF, you don't need to do that at the web server level
at all:
http://www.doughughes.net/index.cfm/page-blogLink/entryId-37
You'll notice that this is an SES URL, on an IIS 6 server, that points to a
simple description of how to set up SES URLs
-Original Message-
From: Judah McAuley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2007 4:49 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Apache config
Dave Watts wrote:
snip
Well, if you're using CF, you don't need to do that at the web server
level
at all:
http
-
From: Judah McAuley
To: CF-Talk
Sent: Sat Jan 20 21:49:23 2007
Subject: Re: Apache config
Dave Watts wrote:
snip
Well, if you're using CF, you don't need to do that at the web server
level
at all:
http://www.doughughes.net/index.cfm/page-blogLink/entryId-37
You'll notice
Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) wrote:
Granted, while it is a cleaner URL it is in no way friendly, it's an ugly
hack.
An ugly hack? How so? A URL (or more properly a URI) is meant to provide
a descriptive and permanent location for a piece of content. The url I
provided does exactly that. One of
20 23:50:52 2007
Subject: Re: Apache config
Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) wrote:
Granted, while it is a cleaner URL it is in no way friendly, it's an ugly
hack.
An ugly hack? How so? A URL (or more properly a URI) is meant to provide
a descriptive and permanent location for a piece of content
Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) wrote:
Well, your URL is simple a rewrite of index.cfm?foo=foo, it is not a
permanent location for this document in that if I bookmark this page and you
delete foo, I will be 100% guaranteed to get it again. This is simple a
facade onto the normal query string
PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Apache config
Dave Watts wrote:
snip
Well, if you're using CF, you don't need to do that at the web server
level
at all:
http://www.doughughes.net/index.cfm/page-blogLink/entryId-37
You'll notice that this is an SES URL, on an IIS 6 server
-Original Message-
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2007 3:25 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Apache config
snip
As for the whole open source argument, no, IIS nor third-party IIS tools
are
open source. For something that is essentially
Latest version of Apache requires that you add a Directory entry to allow
access to that directory. Something like
Directory F:/resources
Options FollowSymLinks
AllowOverride None
Order deny,allow
Allow from all
/Directory
You can check the error log to see what the problem
Apache beats the pants off IIS, but it has a bit of a learning curve.
One important measurement of how good a product is, is how easy it is to
learn and use.
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized
instruction
it
has taken everyone here that uses IIS quite awhile to learn it in the
beginning.
Doug B.
- Original Message -
From: Dave Watts [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk cf-talk@houseoffusion.com
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 6:04 PM
Subject: RE: Apache config
Apache beats the pants off IIS
Yeah Russ, I thought that might be it when I was working this last
night. I'm serving up cfml content out of the root just fine, just not
getting my resources straight. I'll check my logs, but just in case,
here's what I've been trying, but still not having any luck (any hints
on doing this
I completely disagree with that statement. Ease of use has
(nearly) nothing to do with how good or bad a particular
product is.
That is an absurd statement on its face. Ease of use may not be the most
important factor in judging the quality or value of something, but it is an
important
Seems I had my page cached. I bring it up now (with that config) and all
is well. Just a fluke (I never turn on caching...) Thanks to everyone
for their help.
Dave, I have to disagree to a point. Ease of use isn't the question,
really, it's 'What is the best tool for the job?' IIS doesn't
-Original Message-
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 9:29 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Apache config
I completely disagree with that statement. Ease of use has
(nearly) nothing to do with how good or bad a particular
product
Did you get anywhere with this? I remember talking to a friend about this a
long time ago. I never did look into it.
Adrian
-Original Message-
From: Martin Orth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 29 March 2006 01:23
To: CF-Talk
Subject: ot: apache config for cf and php
Hello,
I tried to
66 matches
Mail list logo
