On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 07:51:37AM -0500, Michael Jang wrote:
>
> I'm not asking for the release date of the next version of Red
> Hat. I am asking if anyone has any "informed speculation" on when
> the beta for Red Hat Linux 8.0 might be available.
You can always grab "Red Hat Linux XPerimental"
VIVA LINUX !
-Original Message-
From: Chris Mason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 09 December 2001 22:58
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: RedHat 8.0 beta
My webserver (7.1) runs fifty websites, lots of email, dns, lots of
traffic crashed after 140 days of uptime. I think the techs
My webserver (7.1) runs fifty websites, lots of email, dns, lots of
traffic crashed after 140 days of uptime. I think the techs pulled the
plug out by mistake! I beleive it would run forever if no-one troubles
it. I love linux.
On Sat, 2001-12-08 at 12:29, Pieter De Wit wrote:
> Hello Guys,
>
>
others...I still
think RedHat is better for me.
This is also a "success story" then :)
Cheers,
Pieter
-Original Message-
From: Manzabar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 7:03 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: RedHat 8.0 beta
[EMAIL PROTECTED] did pen t
On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, Jim Bija wrote:
> By default install my hosts file was as such:
>
> 127.0.0.1ns2 localhost.localdomain localhost
Yeah, that's good. Now trying to resolve the local host address to a name
will result in your host name.
> this is a a ns2 server as well as www server, du
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Friday 07 December 2001 06:32 pm, Jim Bija wrote:
> OK, i think i have a handle on this one now guys. I believe what our
> problem is as someone said a hostname problem of some sort. Ill put
> out what ive seen newbie style and someone who knows l
---
From: "Gordon Messmer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "dave brett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 4:45 PM
Subject: Re: RedHat 8.0 beta
> David~
>
> Your server is probably configured incorrectly, similarly to J
David~
Your server is probably configured incorrectly, similarly to Jim's.
If you're looking for evidence of the problem, don't expect IE to hand it
to you. Install ngrep or ethereal on the web server, and use it to watch
the traffic on port 80. I expect that you will see a conversation like
I tried and it did exactly as you said. Which means I have something
missconfigured on my web server as well.
I just learned something new. Now I need to find something new again
where the configuration for this is. :)
david
On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, Devon wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE---
Hi Gordon
I tried out of curiosity. It didn't work for me. The server is a rh 6.2
running the standard apache server with nothing extra added. The browser
was MS Internet explorer 5.
http://server/documents ---> gets page cannot be displayed
http://server/documnets/ ---> gets the directory l
Gordon Messmer wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, Jim Bija wrote:
>
> > Untill redhat 7.2 they never had to add the trailing slash. Please explain.
>
> When the server is configured correctly, it redirects the browser to the
> correct URL. If a URL resolves to a directory, then it must end in a
> slas
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Friday 07 December 2001 01:17 am, Jim Bija wrote:
> During this its obvious your using Mozilla. I am using I-E 6.0.
> If i goto www.my.com/~jim it dont work. if i goto www.my.com/~jim/ it
> does. fresh redhat 7.2 install..
> untill redhat 7.2 this
On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, Jim Bija wrote:
> Untill redhat 7.2 they never had to add the trailing slash. Please explain.
When the server is configured correctly, it redirects the browser to the
correct URL. If a URL resolves to a directory, then it must end in a
slash to be valid. Therefore, when t
** Reply to message from Bret Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 06 Dec 2001
22:23:30 -0600
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Ed Wilts wrote:
> > >
> > > The bottom line is I'm not complaining because there is nothing worthwhile
> > > complaining about, let alone be annoyed
On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, Devon wrote:
> The browser asked for http://www.tuxfan.homeip.net:8080/rpms, got a 301
> error, and immediatly asked again, including the trailing slash.
> This is on a clean install of 7.2, using apache as provided by Redhat.
> Note that the user was not required to provide
Devon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:51 AM
Subject: Re: RedHat 8.0 beta
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Friday 07 December 2001 12:22 am, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> > On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Jim Bija
ROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:22 AM
Subject: Re: RedHat 8.0 beta
> On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Jim Bija wrote:
>
> > I gues i have a question in here too, does the version that comes with
> > redhat 7.2 by default COMPILE require the trailing slash?
>
> No. Apache *
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Friday 07 December 2001 12:22 am, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Jim Bija wrote:
> > I gues i have a question in here too, does the version that comes
> > with redhat 7.2 by default COMPILE require the trailing slash?
>
> No. Apache *
On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Jim Bija wrote:
> I gues i have a question in here too, does the version that comes with
> redhat 7.2 by default COMPILE require the trailing slash?
No. Apache *always* requires the trailing '/' character. When apache
receives a request for a directory without a trailing sl
[EMAIL PROTECTED] did pen these words on 12/6/01 at 8:55 PM
>Yeah, that's the problem with this sort of thing. All you hear about on
>this list are the problems (and we have only heard few). I'm not sure
>about the enigma list as I don't have time to belong to both. You don't
>hear from someone
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Ed Wilts wrote:
> >
> > The bottom line is I'm not complaining because there is nothing worthwhile
> > complaining about, let alone be annoyed about. As always, though, your
> > mileage WILL vary, and it sounds like it has.
>
> Yeah, that's the prob
On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Ed Wilts wrote:
>
> The bottom line is I'm not complaining because there is nothing worthwhile
> complaining about, let alone be annoyed about. As always, though, your
> mileage WILL vary, and it sounds like it has.
Yeah, that's the problem with this sort of thing. All you he
On Thu, 06 Dec 2001 11:15:47 -0800
Joe Brenner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> implied:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > > Michael Jang wrote:
>
> > > MJ>I'm not asking for the release date of the next version of Red
Hat. I am
> > > MJ>asking if anyone has any "informed speculation" on when the
beta for
On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 11:15:47AM -0800, Joe Brenner wrote:
>
> Now that strikes me as a very good question. Isn't there
> anyone out there slightly annoyed about the quality (or lack
> thereof) of the 7.2 release?
Not me. 7.2 has not caused me any grief. I caused myself some grief, but
no
to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Trond Eivind Glomsrød
> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:15 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: RedHat 8.0 beta
>
>
> Dale Kosan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Mandrake, oh no.I had it and nothing but problems, still t
On Jue 06 Dic 2001 18:14, you wrote:
> Dale Kosan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Mandrake, oh no.I had it and nothing but problems, still they admit
> > it and are working on fixing all the bugs
>
> The main problems experienced with RHL 7.2 are bad CDs (not much we
> can do about the mai
Dale Kosan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Mandrake, oh no.I had it and nothing but problems, still they admit
> it and are working on fixing all the bugs
The main problems experienced with RHL 7.2 are bad CDs (not much we
can do about the main problem, detection can be improved) and buggy
Mandrake, oh no.I had it and nothing but problems, still they admit
it and are working on fixing all the bugs
___
Redhat-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Bryan Koschmann wrote:
> extra junk thrown is was made to be just like that, running everything
> through the explorer looking thing. Maybe I've been out of it for too
> long, but I was really impressed with the changes made from 6.2 to 7.1.
Call me strange if you will, but I
On 6 Dec 2001, Trond Eivind [iso-8859-1] Glomsrød wrote:
|> Now that strikes me as a very good question. Isn't there
|> anyone out there slightly annoyed about the quality (or lack
|> thereof) of the 7.2 release?
|
|It's a very good release, I don't feel any need need to do a 7.3
|version for "
Joe Brenner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > > Michael Jang wrote:
>
> > > MJ>I'm not asking for the release date of the next version of Red Hat. I am
> > > MJ>asking if anyone has any "informed speculation" on when the beta for Red
> > > MJ>Hat Linux 8.0 might be av
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Michael Jang wrote:
> > MJ>I'm not asking for the release date of the next version of Red Hat. I am
> > MJ>asking if anyone has any "informed speculation" on when the beta for Red
> > MJ>Hat Linux 8.0 might be available.
> And why not a 7.3 version?
Now that stri
*** REPLY SEPARATOR ***
On 6/12/2001 at 9:01 AM [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[gregausit/redhat-list] wrote:
>On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Michael Jang wrote:
>
>> Folks,
>>
>> I'm not asking for the release date of the next version of Red Hat. I am
>> asking if anyone has any "informed speculatio
"Michael Jang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Folks,
>
> I'm not asking for the release date of the next version of Red Hat. I am
> asking if anyone has any "informed speculation" on when the beta for Red
> Hat Linux 8.0 might be available.
If we make an 8.0 release, and if we make a beta thereo
On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Michael Jang wrote:
> Folks,
>
> I'm not asking for the release date of the next version of Red Hat. I am
> asking if anyone has any "informed speculation" on when the beta for Red
> Hat Linux 8.0 might be available.
I can say with authority that it will be a few months befor
On Jue 06 Dic 2001 10:53, you wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Michael Jang posted the following:
>
> MJ>Folks,
> MJ>
> MJ>I'm not asking for the release date of the next version of Red Hat. I am
> MJ>asking if anyone has any "informed speculation" o
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Michael Jang posted the following:
MJ>Folks,
MJ>
MJ>I'm not asking for the release date of the next version of Red Hat. I am
MJ>asking if anyone has any "informed speculation" on when the beta for Red
MJ>Hat Linux 8.0 might be ava
37 matches
Mail list logo
