Bug#605123: apache2.2-common: "incorrect" definitions of Common Log Format and Combined Log Format

2012-04-14 Thread Stefan Fritsch
On Saturday 14 April 2012, you wrote: > Well than simply rename them? Or at least add a comment that this > is not what people (or 3rd party products) may expect. ok, I will add a comment. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-apache-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Troub

Bug#605123: apache2.2-common: "incorrect" definitions of Common Log Format and Combined Log Format

2012-04-14 Thread Christoph Anton Mitterer
On Sat, 2012-04-14 at 21:26 +0200, Stefan Fritsch wrote: > We had that in the past. The problem with %b is that it gives no > indication if the request was a partial request but always logs the > size of the complete document. I think that the inaccuracies because > of the headers are smaller th

Bug#605123: apache2.2-common: "incorrect" definitions of Common Log Format and Combined Log Format

2010-11-27 Thread Christoph Anton Mitterer
btw: This applies als to the other vhost combined version. Another reason to really use the _same_ definition of CLF as apache does is, that this format is already hardcoded in case no LogFormat Directive is given and TransferLog is used. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Bug#605123: apache2.2-common: "incorrect" definitions of Common Log Format and Combined Log Format

2010-11-27 Thread Christoph Anton Mitterer
Package: apache2.2-common Version: 2.2.16-4 Severity: minor Hi. In the apache2.conf you make some predefined log-formats, including one for the Common Log Format and one for the Combined Log Format. Those are defined there using %O for the number of bytes. Most other resources I could find (e.g