Apache behaviour with this patch (or without mod_cache):
The request:
GET https://whatever.html HTTP/1.0
is equivalent to:
GET / HTTP/1.0
I'm wondering whether this is the desired behaviour? This is
also the behaviour of a 1.3.x Apache. Maybe Apache should block
this kind of
Yes please ! And if you could also add a nice feature to be able to switch
logging on and off - that would be even nicer (i.e. rather than using
clever !env= conditional logging - just be able to say that for this
Vhost/Directory/File logging is 'off' (and not /dev/null or any hack)).
Dw.
On Sa
Kris Verbeeck wrote:
> Apache behaviour with this patch (or without mod_cache):
>
> The request:
>
> GET https://whatever.html HTTP/1.0
>
> is equivalent to:
>
> GET / HTTP/1.0
>
> I'm wondering whether this is the desired behaviour? This is
> also the behaviour of a 1.3.x Apach
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> Ideally, you could use the LDAP filters that most PAM implementations
> use, but definitely allow the user to tweak them. I'd like to get
> mod_auth_ldap ported to this, and if we move towards a provider-based
> system, I think mod_auth_ldap should be moved back into t
This look like a filter issue I've seen before; but never could not quite
reproduce. You may want to take this to [EMAIL PROTECTED]; as this is
most likely related to the filters in apache; and not proxy specific.
Dw.
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Peter Van Biesen wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm using an apach
Hi,
as this is probably not due to the proxy, I'm reposting this here.
Can anybody help me ?
Thanks !
Peter.
--- Begin Message ---
Hello,
I'm using an apache 2.0.39 on a HPUX 11.0 system as a webserver/proxy.
When I try to download large files through the proxy, I get the
following error :
However, when downloading a large file from the server itself ( not
using the proxy ), works fine ... either its a problem in the proxy or a
timeout somewhere ( locally is a lot faster ).
Peter.
Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
>
> This look like a filter issue I've seen before; but never could not
Peter Van Biesen wrote:
> However, when downloading a large file from the server itself ( not
> using the proxy ), works fine ... either its a problem in the proxy or a
> timeout somewhere ( locally is a lot faster ).
The proxy is very "dumb" code, it relies almost exclusively on the
filter cod
It seems like the latest httpd from CVS doesn't prepend ServerRoot
to to log paths. If I start the httpd like this,
/home/perl/apache2/bin/httpd -d /home/web/front/ -k start -e debug
I get an error that it can't open logs/error_log.
If I chdir to /home/web/front/ I don't get an error message,
I am using the latest httpd from CVS.
I can't get mod_disk_cache to cache anything but 301's.
I suspect it's something related to the headers I (don't) send.
$ lwp-request -e -d -S http://nntp.x.perl.org/
GET http://nntp.x.perl.org/ --> 200 OK
Connection: close
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 11:34:58
"CacheOn on" sounds pretty silly. Wouldn't it be better if it was
"CacheOn yes" or just "Cache on"? :-)
- ask
--
ask bjoern hansen, http://www.askbjoernhansen.com/ !try; do();
Apache won't initialize... look at the name passed when
opening/creating the file:
open("logs/access_log", O_WRONLY|O_APPEND|O_CREAT, 0666) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or
directory)
gettimeofday({1030448472, 125843}, NULL) = 0
write(2, "[Tue Aug 27 11:41:12 2002] [erro"..., 115) = 115
_exit(1)
-
Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
> "CacheOn on" sounds pretty silly. Wouldn't it be better if it was
> "CacheOn yes" or just "Cache on"? :-)
Or another question: What does CacheOn do that CacheEnable doesn't
already do?
Regards,
Graham
--
-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> I need to be able to get at the authentication backends to implement
> some DAV enhancements - namely DAV has its own authentication model
> (DAV ACL support). My idea would be to allow mod_dav to reuse the
> aaa backends and just implement the c
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Graham Leggett wrote:
> The filter code behaves differently depending on where the data is
> coming from, eg an area in memory, or a file on a disk. As a result it
> is quite possible that a large file from disk works and a large file
> from proxy does not.
APR's concept of
What should I call it then ? not-so-tiny-files ? 8-)
Cliff Woolley wrote:
>
> On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Graham Leggett wrote:
>
> > The filter code behaves differently depending on where the data is
> > coming from, eg an area in memory, or a file on a disk. As a result it
> > is quite possible that
In fact, the CacheOn directive simply sets a variable in the mod_cache
data structure which is never checked.
Is there any reason to keep this directive or can I go ahead and remove
CacheOn and the code that sets and merges it (for no good reason)?
Graham Leggett wrote:
> Ask Bjoern Hansen wrot
Are you using the most recent head build of 2.0? There was a
fix applied recently to the header handling for mod_disk_cache.
I am currently doing some work on the caching code, so I'll
look into this. Please let me know if you are on the latest
code.
Thanks,
Paul J. Reder
Ask Bjoern Hansen wro
I kinda like it... reminds me of the Human Torch: Flame On! :)
Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
>
>
> "CacheOn on" sounds pretty silly. Wouldn't it be better if it was
> "CacheOn yes" or just "Cache on"? :-)
>
>
> - ask
>
> --
> ask bjoern hansen, http://www.askbjoernhansen.com/ !try; do();
>
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Paul J. Reder wrote:
> Are you using the most recent head build of 2.0? There was a
> fix applied recently to the header handling for mod_disk_cache.
>
> I am currently doing some work on the caching code, so I'll
> look into this. Please let me know if you are on the latest
Will do.
Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Paul J. Reder wrote:
>
>
>>Are you using the most recent head build of 2.0? There was a
>>fix applied recently to the header handling for mod_disk_cache.
>>
>>I am currently doing some work on the caching code, so I'll
>>look into this.
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Peter Van Biesen wrote:
> > APR's concept of a "large file" (which is the concept used by file
> > buckets, btw) is >2GB.
>
> What should I call it then ? not-so-tiny-files ? 8-)
hehehe I was just pointing out that < 70MB vs. > 70MB shouldn't make any
difference as far as A
Taking those sentiments into account ;), if there are no *other*
reasons to keep CacheOn (since it does nothing) I will be committing
a fix this afternoon that removes it.
Jim Jagielski wrote:
> I kinda like it... reminds me of the Human Torch: Flame On! :)
>
> Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
>
>>
>>
Hi Justin -
>-- Original Message --
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 23:44:32 -0700
>From: Justin Erenkrantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: authentication rewrite
>
>My point is that I need to add another front end authentication
>module (namely withi
+1
Brad Nicholes
Senior Software Engineer
Novell, Inc., the leading provider of Net business solutions
http://www.novell.com
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tuesday, August 27, 2002 4:20:43 AM >>>
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> Ideally, you could use the LDAP filters that most PAM
implementations
> use, but
Hi -
Shouldn't a new thread be spawned for an(other) ldap vote (its deja vu all
over again :)
sterling
>-- Original Message --
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 08:20:05 -0600
>From: "Brad Nicholes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re
Now that 2.0.40 has been released and we are in development of .41
and the fact that there has been a proposal for re-architecting the AUTH
modules, I would like to propose that we move AUTH_LDAP out of it's own
project and into experimental. This will enable AUTH_LDAP to get more
exposure as
I am very much against putting more modules into the standard server.
Ryan
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Brad Nicholes wrote:
>Now that 2.0.40 has been released and we are in development of .41
> and the fact that there has been a proposal for re-architecting the AUTH
> modules, I would like to pro
Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
> It seems like the latest httpd from CVS doesn't prepend ServerRoot
> to to log paths. If I start the httpd like this,
>
> /home/perl/apache2/bin/httpd -d /home/web/front/ -k start -e debug
>
> I get an error that it can't open logs/error_log.
>
> If I chdir to /home/
At 07:53 AM 8/27/2002, Peter Van Biesen wrote:
>What should I call it then ? not-so-tiny-files ? 8-)
Nah... large or big files is just fine :-)
I'm guessing $$$s to OOOs [donuts] that your client is starting
some byteranges somewhere along the way. Try adding the bit
\"%{Range}i\" in one of yo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I am very much against putting more modules into the standard server.
I think such a decision should be based on whether it is desirable for
core Apache to offer certain features, not whether there are many or few
modules in the core.
Remember that putting more modu
On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 09:27:16AM -0600, Brad Nicholes wrote:
> modules, I would like to propose that we move AUTH_LDAP out of it's own
> project and into experimental. This will enable AUTH_LDAP to get more
+1.
Especially if the auth rewrite occurs, auth_ldap would become much
simpler. --
Graham Leggett wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> I am very much against putting more modules into the standard server.
>
>
> I think such a decision should be based on whether it is desirable for
> core Apache to offer certain features, not whether there are many or few
> modules in the
On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 12:44:35PM -0400, Joshua Slive wrote:
> I would be happier with a good system for integrating non-core modules,
> such as an apache-rollup or a CPAN/freebsd ports like system. BUT, since
> nobody seems willing to step-up and create such a system, I think it
> would be a
On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 10:12:43AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> than the current AAA modules. In a 'require group' world, it is very nice
> to abstract this stuff out so backends can be re-used, and apache specific
> logic can be centralized - as you have proposed. But it will be harder
> t
A couple of notes on the parser:
- It is pretty lightweight and self contained
- This HTML parser can be used for a multitude of applications, in Apache
2.0 filter modules. The filter processes content generated by Apache or proxied
content and can rewrite URLs embedded in HTML pages:
a) URL rew
Aaron Bannert wrote:
> I would *love* to see this happen. I think a decoupling of modules
> from the core httpd server would give us many benefits:
True, but keeping functionality out of the server until such a system
exists is a mistake. Any CPAN style system should not hold up
development of
The Apache 2 modules in the httpd-ldap sub-project (which should be moved
into 'experimental' in my opinion and have standard MSVC++ projects created,
etc -- though I have no vote) crash on Windows 2000 in Apache 2.0.40. [Yes,
I'll file a bug as appropriate.]
The issue is use of uninitialized
On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 09:47:58AM -0700, daniel wrote:
>
> A couple of notes on the parser:
> - It is pretty lightweight and self contained
> - This HTML parser can be used for a multitude of applications, in Apache
> 2.0 filter modules. The filter processes content generated by Apache or proxie
Has anyone gotten the Apache httpd-ldap sub-project modules to load into
Apache 2.0 on AIX?
I've gotten them to build just fine (and gotten them to run just fine on
Windows [after a patch] and Solaris), but I Apache (2.0.40) fails to
load mod_ldap.so on AIX.
I'm only getting the "Syntax error
Well, if people are agreeing to this, can we get someone involved
in the HTTPD project (non-Covalent affiliated) to review and
approve/decline? Volunteers?
-- Jon
On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 01:22:03PM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> I didn't mean in the same tree at all! :)
>
> But, as you said, a
Jon Travis wrote:
> Well, if people are agreeing to this, can we get someone involved
> in the HTTPD project (non-Covalent affiliated) to review and
> approve/decline? Volunteers?
> I can't publicly post the source under the ASF license until it has been
> accepted (which is a chicken & egg i
> Yeah, you hit the problem with stacking - authoritative. I'm not
> sure how useful having multiple backends could be. I'd almost
> suggest that something like a PAM backend would be much better and
> allows a fairly standard configuration. (I know Dirk has a PAM
It is integrated into the PA
Graham Leggett wrote:
> Aaron Bannert wrote:
>
>> I would *love* to see this happen. I think a decoupling of modules
>> from the core httpd server would give us many benefits:
>
>
> True, but keeping functionality out of the server until such a system
> exists is a mistake. Any CPAN style syst
Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
> It seems like the latest httpd from CVS doesn't prepend ServerRoot
> to to log paths. If I start the httpd like this,
>
> /home/perl/apache2/bin/httpd -d /home/web/front/ -k start -e debug
>
> I get an error that it can't open logs/error_log.
>
> If I chdir to /home/
> I can't publicly post the source under the ASF license until it has been
> accepted (which is a chicken & egg issue). I can, however, distribute
> to individuals on a restricted basis for evaluation for acceptance.
There is little (except for a few upset board members) stopping Covalent
of po
> can you check the latest CVS version now and see if it fixes your
problem?
Fixes the startup failure I was seeing earlier this a.m. on Win32.
Allan
Hi all,
I would like to propose a change to apachectl (for 2.0 although
work with 1.3 as well)
I like using toggles in the default httpd.conf files
I provide to customers (for things like Tomcat connectors, PHP...),
The problem with the toggles is getting them on the command line.
With
I realized earlier today that I haven't been seeing commit messages.
Is anybody getting these messages?
Ryan
--
___
Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
550 Jean St
Oakland CA 94610
-
I see them
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I realized earlier today that I haven't been seeing commit messages.
>
> Is anybody getting these messages?
>
> Ryan
>
> --
>
> ___
> Ryan Bloom
On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 02:15:16PM -0400, Dave Hill wrote:
> I would like to propose a change to apachectl (for 2.0 although
> work with 1.3 as well)
>
> I like using toggles in the default httpd.conf files
> I provide to customers (for things like Tomcat connectors, PHP...),
> The problem
a big +1...
On Mon, Aug 26, 2002 at 11:44:32PM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>...
> My point is that I need to add another front end authentication
> module (namely within mod_dav). I think it'd be pointless to
> duplicate all of the backend work done in mod_auth* so that
> mod_dav can authent
Hi -
>-- Original Message --
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 09:51:09 -0700
>From: Justin Erenkrantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: authentication rewrite
>
>
>On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 10:12:43AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Without seeing use cas
fyi, I've already emailed Jon about doing a review. I would recommend that
at least one other review it, too.
On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 10:28:18AM -0700, Jon Travis wrote:
> Well, if people are agreeing to this, can we get someone involved
> in the HTTPD project (non-Covalent affiliated) to review
At 12:43 PM -0700 8/27/02, Greg Stein wrote:
>
>> > APR is whatever we want it to be. If we start building things on
>
>You bet!
Well, it depends on how far you want to take the statement "whatever
we want it to be" :) *duck*
> > > top of APR that are functionally distinct from other projects u
Both Apache 1.3.x and 2.0.x suffer a severe perfomance issue when the server
is on Windows and the client is Solaris (and perhaps others).
Before you stop reading this as simply "we know Windows does not perform
well", I should point out that this does not occur when the client is Windows
or L
Jess M. Holle wrote:
> Both Apache 1.3.x and 2.0.x suffer a severe perfomance issue when the
> server is on Windows and the client is Solaris (and perhaps others).
>
> Before you stop reading this as simply "we know Windows does not perform
> well", I should point out that this does not occur w
Hi -
>-- Original Message --
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 16:14:20 -0400
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: Jim Jagielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: more on the charter (was: El-Kabong -- HTML Parser)
>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>Would it destroy APR to fold e-k into it...
On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 04:14:20PM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> At 12:43 PM -0700 8/27/02, Greg Stein wrote:
> >
> >> > APR is whatever we want it to be. If we start building things on
> >
> >You bet!
>
> Well, it depends on how far you want to take the statement "whatever
> we want it to be" :)
Ian Holsman wrote:
Jess M. Holle
wrote:
Both Apache 1.3.x and 2.0.x suffer a severe perfomance
issue when the server is on Windows and the client is Solaris (and perhaps
others).
Before you stop reading this as simply "we know Windows does not perform
well", I should point out that this
Jess,
Were IIS and Tomcat on the same windows hardware as
the Apache httpds? Are you seeing network issues
(e.g.- rexmits) -- you might have them everywhere, but
your Solaris may not be configured well (ndd,MTU,etc).
--cw
-Original Message-
From: Jess M. Holle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTE
I can check into this (as I said another engineer ran the tests), but
these servers were on the same network segments.
Also, our customers are seeing roughly the same numbers (at least for
Apache 1.3 -- they're not up to 2.0 yet).
--
Jess Holle
Clay Webster wrote:
>Jess,
>
>Were IIS and Tom
Greg Stein wrote:
>
>
> > Regarding specifically e-k, as a html parser, it's
> > got more a family tie, IMO, to the HTTP server project, than APR.
> > I think it fits in better among libapreq than in the APR world,
> > mostly because it's focused towards the web server and web server
> > functio
Has anyone gotten the Apache 2 httpd-ldap sub-project modules to *work*
(not just build) on AIX?
I tried with Apache 2.0.40 and the mod_ldap.so still won't load and it
won't tell me why not
[Overall, Apache 2 is a bear on AIX -- given gcc symbol shuffling
exercises and libtool issues.]
-
On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 02:43:24PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I could send a patch to your current code if that would be clearer - its
> really pretty simple, but would allow the backends to get at least a little
> more powerful (and would solve the ldap_prop case i illustrated above
Defin
On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 03:27:10PM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 02:43:24PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I could send a patch to your current code if that would be clearer - its
> > really pretty simple, but would allow the backends to get at least a little
> > m
On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 05:03:11PM -0700, Greg Stein wrote:
> Put it in there, then :-)
>
> I haven't really seen any objects so far. And hey... this *is* version
> control. It can always be backed out :-)
I don't want to add it in and then have to back it out because people
didn't realize that
On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 05:02:19PM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 05:03:11PM -0700, Greg Stein wrote:
> > Put it in there, then :-)
> >
> > I haven't really seen any objects so far. And hey... this *is* version
> > control. It can always be backed out :-)
>
> I don't w
In apache-1.3 it was possible to shortcut the translation handler, by
returning OK right away, thus saving several stat() syscalls when you
knew that your handler is virtual and doesn't need to run the
uri->filename translation.
In httpd-2.0 this doesn't work anymore. mod_mime's find_ct() segfaul
I'd like to second that !
Peter.
Brad Nicholes wrote:
>
>Now that 2.0.40 has been released and we are in development of .41
> and the fact that there has been a proposal for re-architecting the AUTH
> modules, I would like to propose that we move AUTH_LDAP out of it's own
> project and into
70 matches
Mail list logo
