RE: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18)

2001-12-11 Thread Dave Seidel
Whoops, that was a typo. I am indeed using the 2.0.28 beta release. Sorry for the confusion. -Original Message- From: Cliff Woolley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 11:40 AM To: Apache-Dev; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: problem running 2.0.18 as Win2k service

Re: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18)

2001-12-11 Thread Bill Stoddard
Any messages in the error log? Bill > Whoops, that was a typo. I am indeed using the 2.0.28 beta release. Sorry > for the confusion. > > -Original Message- > From: Cliff Woolley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 11:40 AM > To: Apache-Dev; [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18)

2001-12-11 Thread Dave Seidel
Nope, 0 bytes in the error log. -Original Message- From: Bill Stoddard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 12:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18) Any messages in the error log? Bill

Re: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18)

2001-12-11 Thread Bill Stoddard
TED]] > Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 12:01 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18) > > > Any messages in the error log? > > Bill > > > Whoops, that was a typo. I am indeed using the 2.0.2

Re: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18)

2001-12-11 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
: "Dave Seidel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 10:58 AM Subject: RE: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18) > Whoops, that was a typo. I am indeed using the 2.0.28 beta rele

RE: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18)

2001-12-11 Thread Dave Seidel
ser a member of the Administrators group, it still doesn't work. -Original Message- From: Bill Stoddard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 12:56 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18)

RE: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18)

2001-12-11 Thread Dave Seidel
PROTECTED] Subject: Re: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18) bin\apache -k install -n Apache2 THEN; apache -k start -n apache2 -OR- net start Apache2 The Apache2 (default) may have tripped you up. Keeps it distinct from 1.3 generation apache services, but you can use the

RE: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18)

2001-12-11 Thread Dave Seidel
t: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 2:27 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18) Dave, win32 canonicalization requires list/read access to each directory above Apache directories, to the root. It doesn't have to have access to thei

Re: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18)

2001-12-11 Thread Dwayne Miller
t have permission to open a filehandle to >the directory. > >Bill > > > >From: "Dave Seidel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "Bill Stoddard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 1:15 PM >Subject: RE: pr

RE: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18)

2001-12-11 Thread Dave Seidel
This is precisely the same as what I'm seeing, the only difference being that I built from the 2.0.28 archive. -Original Message- From: Dwayne Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 3:46 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: problem running 2.0.28 as

RE: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18)

2001-12-12 Thread Dave Seidel
oblem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18) This is precisely the same as what I'm seeing, the only difference being that I built from the 2.0.28 archive. -Original Message- From: Dwayne Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 3:46 PM To: [EMAIL PROTEC

Re: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18)

2001-12-12 Thread Dwayne Miller
using VC 6.0, using the InstallBin target in the >IDE, using all the project files as they came from the zip archive. > >-Original Message- >From: Dave Seidel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 3:53 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: RE: pro

RE: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18)

2001-12-12 Thread Dave Seidel
No SSL in either. -Original Message- From: Dwayne Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 10:45 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18) Did you build with SSL support? Does the MSI file contain SSL support

Re: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18)

2001-12-12 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
From: "Dave Seidel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 9:10 AM > FYI, I did my local build using VC 6.0, using the InstallBin target in the > IDE, using all the project files as they came from the zip archive. Dave, if you grab a recent PlatformSDK from Microsoft's site, and

RE: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18)

2001-12-12 Thread Dave Seidel
einstalled VS6SP5, rebuilt from scratch again. Same problem. -Original Message- From: William A. Rowe, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 12:38 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18) F

RE: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18)

2001-12-13 Thread Dave Seidel
EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: problem running 2.0.28 as Win2k service (was 2.0.18) OK, I installed the August 2001 Platform SDK from the November MSDN issue (if there's a later one, they haven't sent it, and the website is down). Made sure to install the Visual Studio integration, etc. Wiped o