You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@httpd.apache.org by Duncan Brannen <db...@st-andrews.ac.uk> on 2006/05/02 14:14:00 UTC
[users@httpd] Apache 2.2.X Solaris 10, server parsed html includes seem broken
Is anyone running Apache 2.2.X on Solaris 10? I've seen the following
behaviour with
both 2.2.0 and 2.2.2
I've a .shtml file which includes another file
<Head> <Title> Test</Title></Head>
<Body>
<!--#include virtual="/include_test.html" -->
</Body>
include_test.shtml is a comment, but does not have to be.
<!-- this is a comment designed to pad out to 255
this is a comment designed to pad out to 255
this is a comment designed to pad out to 255
this is a comment designed to pad out to 255
this is a comment designed to pad out to 255
this is a comment designed to pad out to 255-->
Once the length of the included file reaches 255 characters The page
served back to the browser
becomes corrupted eg
> 10
>
>
> </Body>
>
>
>
> 0
and I get the following error in the error_log
[Tue May 02 12:13:00 2006] [info] [client 138.251.x.y] (14)Bad address: core_output_filter: writing data to the network
I did a make clean & configured with no options to make sure it wasn't a module I'd included.
This doesn't happen in 2.0.58 on the same machine, compiled with the same environment.
Thoughts? I've filed a bug report.
Duncan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
" from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: [users@httpd] Apache 2.2.X Solaris 10, sendfile behaviour changed?
Posted by Duncan Brannen <db...@st-andrews.ac.uk>.
Probably one for the developers but from an ldd of the httpd binaries,
both the 2.0.58 and 2.2.2 binaries are using /lib/sendfile.so.1
So - anyone running 2.2.X in a zone under Solaris 10. Since it looks
like it may be a sendfile problem, I'll guess it could be to do with
how Solaris 10 mounts file systems into zones combined with a slightly
different way of using sendfile in 2.2.
Too much speculation here :)
Duncan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
" from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: [users@httpd] Apache 2.2.X Solaris 10, server parsed html includes
seem broken
Posted by Duncan Brannen <db...@st-andrews.ac.uk>.
Looks like this is the sendfile problem from the 2.0 error FAQ.
Adding
EnableSendFile off
to the server config fixes the problem.
Looks like the configure scripts from 2.2.X and 2.0.58 differ in their
checks for sendfile support?
Cheers,
Duncan
Duncan Brannen wrote:
>
> Is anyone running Apache 2.2.X on Solaris 10? I've seen the following
> behaviour with
> both 2.2.0 and 2.2.2
>
> I've a .shtml file which includes another file
>
> <Head> <Title> Test</Title></Head>
> <Body>
> <!--#include virtual="/include_test.html" -->
> </Body>
>
> include_test.shtml is a comment, but does not have to be.
>
> <!-- this is a comment designed to pad out to 255
> this is a comment designed to pad out to 255
> this is a comment designed to pad out to 255
> this is a comment designed to pad out to 255
> this is a comment designed to pad out to 255
> this is a comment designed to pad out to 255-->
>
>
> Once the length of the included file reaches 255 characters The page
> served back to the browser
> becomes corrupted eg
>
>> 10
>>
>>
>> </Body>
>>
>>
>> 0
> and I get the following error in the error_log
>
> [Tue May 02 12:13:00 2006] [info] [client 138.251.x.y] (14)Bad
> address: core_output_filter: writing data to the network
>
>
> I did a make clean & configured with no options to make sure it wasn't
> a module I'd included.
>
> This doesn't happen in 2.0.58 on the same machine, compiled with the
> same environment.
>
>
> Thoughts? I've filed a bug report.
>
> Duncan
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server
> Project.
> See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
> " from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
" from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org