Günter Knauf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> unfortunately we have symlinks only on *nix platforms, so for
> all other platforms this isnt a solution...
> Guenter.
Unices all? have symlinks and NT supports lins too.
Then still people could instead of symlinking the data copy the configs
in a
On Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 09:34:08AM -0700, Aaron Bannert wrote:
> +1 for removing the mod-status and mod-info sections from the default
> config entirely. In an ideal world there would be no default config,
Blech. -0 on removing it from the default configuration. IMHO,
it's useful - just leave i
On Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 02:55:07PM +0200, Günter Knauf wrote:
> Hi,
> I've been asked now a couple of times for a configuration sample for mod_deflate;
>and since mod_deflate is now a 'normal' module and no more experimental I think there
>should be a sample in the httpd.conf; if you dont think
On Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 10:26:46AM -0400, Joshua Slive wrote:
> Günter Knauf wrote:
>
> >the patch doesnt enable the modules, just only it's easier to enable them
> >with only removing one # at the load command...; also I'm more thinking of
> >disabling the modules after I have already used the
unfortunately we have symlinks only on *nix platforms, so for all other platforms this
isnt a solution...
Guenter.
> Better do the configs the 'debian way' then:
> /etc/apache2/ containing:
> apache2.conf : default config for running Apache2 minimally.
> ports.conf : "Port 443" etc directives
> Bill Stoddard wrote:
> >
> > Playing devil's advocate :-) mod_status and mod_info should NOT be loaded by
>default.
> >
>
> Agreed! Wouldn't this change set things up so that if someone does
> a compile with mod_status and mod_info included, the resultant
> config file would make them active?
Günter Knauf wrote:
>>Ahhh, but you forget that not everyone uses DSO modules. Many people
>>compile the modules into the server, and for them the module is active
>>regardless of the LoadModule line.
>
> Ok, that was the point I missed and convinces me that it's not such a good idea
>then...
>
Günter Knauf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > Ahhh, but you forget that not everyone uses DSO modules.
> Many people
> > compile the modules into the server, and for them the
> module is active
> > regardless of the LoadModule line.
> Ok, that was the point I missed and convinces me that i
> Ahhh, but you forget that not everyone uses DSO modules. Many people
> compile the modules into the server, and for them the module is active
> regardless of the LoadModule line.
Ok, that was the point I missed and convinces me that it's not such a good idea then...
then let's make another su
On Fri, 21 Jun 2002, [ISO-8859-1] Günter Knauf wrote:
> the patch doesnt enable the modules, just only it's easier to enable
> them with only removing one # at the load command...;
That assumes you compile DSO's.
> also I'm more thinking of disabling the modules after I have already
> used them
Günter Knauf wrote:
> the patch doesnt enable the modules, just only it's easier to enable them with only
>removing one # at the load command...; also I'm more thinking of disabling the
>modules after I have already used them; and if I then comment the load command I must
>also comment six con
Bill Stoddard wrote:
>
> Playing devil's advocate :-) mod_status and mod_info should NOT be loaded by
>default.
True.
But even if they aren't, adding them in active sections in
the default config is too dangerous in my opinion. Those are
security-sensitive modules, and there is absolute
> Cliff Woolley wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 21 Jun 2002, Bill Stoddard wrote:
>>
>> >> can we apply this simple patch so that we dont have to always
>> >> uncomment
>> >> 12 lines for getting mod_info / mod_status working?
>> >
>> > +1
>>
>> -0.5 Our default config has always taken a minimalist policy,
Bill Stoddard wrote:
>
> Playing devil's advocate :-) mod_status and mod_info should NOT be loaded by
>default.
>
Agreed! Wouldn't this change set things up so that if someone does
a compile with mod_status and mod_info included, the resultant
config file would make them active? That was my
> >
> > On Fri, 21 Jun 2002, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> >
> > >> can we apply this simple patch so that we dont have to always uncomment
> > >> 12 lines for getting mod_info / mod_status working?
> > >
> > > +1
> >
> > -0.5 Our default config has always taken a minimalist policy, I believe.
> >
>
> On Fri, 21 Jun 2002, Bill Stoddard wrote:
>
> >> can we apply this simple patch so that we dont have to always uncomment
> >> 12 lines for getting mod_info / mod_status working?
> >
> > +1
>
> -0.5 Our default config has always taken a minimalist policy, I believe.
>
> --Cliff
>
Is there a rea
Cliff Woolley wrote:
>
> On Fri, 21 Jun 2002, Bill Stoddard wrote:
>
> >> can we apply this simple patch so that we dont have to always uncomment
> >> 12 lines for getting mod_info / mod_status working?
> >
> > +1
>
> -0.5 Our default config has always taken a minimalist policy, I believe.
>
On Fri, 21 Jun 2002, Bill Stoddard wrote:
>> can we apply this simple patch so that we dont have to always uncomment
>> 12 lines for getting mod_info / mod_status working?
>
> +1
-0.5 Our default config has always taken a minimalist policy, I believe.
--Cliff
My vote is to leave this out of the config file but certainly put it in the doc.
Bill
Hi,
I've been asked now a couple of times for a configuration sample for mod_deflate; and
since mod_deflate is now a 'normal' module and no more experimental I think there
should
be a sample in the httpd.conf;
+1
- Original Message -
From: "Günter Knauf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 8:48 AM
Subject: [PATCH] Apache2 httpd.conf
Hi,
can we apply this simple patch so that we dont have to always uncomment 12 lines for
getting
Hi,
I've been asked now a couple of times for a configuration sample for mod_deflate; and
since mod_deflate is now a 'normal' module and no more experimental I think there
should be a sample in the httpd.conf; if you dont think so at least a sample as below
should appear in the docs to mod_defl
Hi,
can we apply this simple patch so that we dont have to always uncomment 12 lines for
getting mod_info / mod_status working?
thanks!
--- httpd-win.conf.orig Thu Jun 13 20:39:04 2002
+++ httpd-win.conf Fri Jun 21 14:26:30 2002
@@ -850,24 +850,28 @@
# Allow server status reports, with the
22 matches
Mail list logo
