- Original Message -
Hello Jan,
Is there any reason we shouldn't do this in trunk?
I don't see any reason. This patch was intended for trunk, but I don't have
svn commit access, so I'm sending patches to this list :). It's also better
that someone reviews my code, because I don't have
Hello,
Apologies in advance for the potential repeat; I initially posted to
modules-dev but realized this is more of an internals problem.
I'm trying to write a module that does what one would intuitively
expect from the following mod_rewrite incantation:
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} !-U
Apache HTTP Server 2.4.6 Released
The Apache Software Foundation and the Apache HTTP Server Project
are pleased to announce the release of version 2.4.6 of the Apache
HTTP Server (Apache). This version of Apache is our latest GA
release of the new generation 2.4.x branch of
On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 10:39:20 +0800 (CST)
Pqf 潘庆峰 p...@mailtech.cn wrote:
Hi, guys
A company need a TCP/IP patch of mod_fcgid or alternative, and
will pay for it, anyone interested? I really like to take it but I
don't have too much time... Anyone interested please reply to me and
I will
On Sun, 21 Jul 2013 00:15:45 +0200
Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
but why does httpd need CAP_DAC_OVERRIDE while starting initially as
root?
CapabilityBoundingSet=CAP_IPC_LOCK CAP_NET_BIND_SERVICE CAP_SETGID
CAP_SETUID Jul 21 00:04:01 srv-rhsoft httpd[8813]: AH00112: Warning:
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 03:07:56PM -0400, Jeff Trawick wrote:
I guess it seems to work in the earlier e-mail is the validation that the
API is sufficient for MPM-ITK.
Hi,
I see that 2.4.6 has been released, with no mention of open_htaccess in the
source code. Was this reverted after 2.4.5? Or
Am 22.07.2013 17:01, schrieb William A. Rowe Jr.:
On Sun, 21 Jul 2013 00:15:45 +0200
Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
but why does httpd need CAP_DAC_OVERRIDE while starting initially as
root?
CapabilityBoundingSet=CAP_IPC_LOCK CAP_NET_BIND_SERVICE CAP_SETGID
CAP_SETUID Jul 21
If it was 770 apache:apache, then root had no access, and root (before
processing the User directive) was 'unable' to verify the existence of the
child directory without violating the apparent access control (not
traditional access control, of course).
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Reindl
thank you - learned another lesson!
Am 22.07.2013 20:37, schrieb William A. Rowe Jr.:
If it was 770 apache:apache, then root had no access, and root (before
processing the User directive) was 'unable'
to verify the existence of the child directory without violating the apparent
access
Yes, split process control from mod_fcgid, merge proxy_fcgi(with
load balance) and mod_fcgid(with authXX support) is a good idea,
admins can use httpd as process manager, or 3rd party process managers as they
like.
But don't just make a patch to make mod_fcgid support TCP/IP, it's ugly...
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 09:46:58 +0800 (CST)
Pqf 潘庆峰 p...@mailtech.cn wrote:
Yes, split process control from mod_fcgid, merge proxy_fcgi(with
load balance) and mod_fcgid(with authXX support) is a good idea,
admins can use httpd as process manager, or 3rd party process
managers as they like. But
11 matches
Mail list logo
