You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Tim Wilde <tw...@dyndns.org> on 2002/08/01 19:40:09 UTC
[PATCH] Added wrappers to httpd-std.conf.in (fwd)
I'm reposting the attached patch yet again, which adds various <IfModule>
sections to the default httpd.conf to allow proper function without
changes to httpd.conf if various modules aren't enabled. Sent this twice
within the last two months now without any response. Makes me wonder if
anyone cares that the default config file just plain doesn't work in many
configurations. This would be an ideal and simple patch to put into
2.0.40. Patch applies cleanly to docs/conf/httpd-std.conf.in from the
2.0.39 release.
Tim Wilde
--
Tim Wilde
twilde@dyndns.org
Systems Administrator
Dynamic DNS Network Services
http://www.dyndns.org/
Re: [PATCH] Added wrappers to httpd-std.conf.in (fwd)
Posted by Wilfredo Sánchez <ws...@wsanchez.net>.
Tim-
Finally got myself a Round Tuit.
-wsv
On Thursday, August 1, 2002, at 10:40 AM, Tim Wilde wrote:
> I'm reposting the attached patch yet again, which adds various
> <IfModule>
> sections to the default httpd.conf to allow proper function without
> changes to httpd.conf if various modules aren't enabled. Sent this
> twice
> within the last two months now without any response. Makes me wonder
> if
> anyone cares that the default config file just plain doesn't work in
> many
> configurations. This would be an ideal and simple patch to put into
> 2.0.40. Patch applies cleanly to docs/conf/httpd-std.conf.in from the
> 2.0.39 release.
>
> Tim Wilde
>
> --
> Tim Wilde
> twilde@dyndns.org
> Systems Administrator
> Dynamic DNS Network Services
> http://www.dyndns.org/
> <httpd-std.conf.in.patch>
Re: [PATCH] Added wrappers to httpd-std.conf.in (fwd)
Posted by Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@Golux.Com>.
Wilfredo Sanchez wrote:
>
> OK, so do people really hate the <IfModule> wrappers? Because I
> wanna commit it. Votes?
>
> We have +1 from Fred, Ian and a 0 of some flavor from Joshua.
+1 from me
--
#ken P-)}
Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Golux.Com/coar/
Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/
"Millennium hand and shrimp!"
Re: [PATCH] Added wrappers to httpd-std.conf.in (fwd)
Posted by Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>.
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 01:53:58PM -0400, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Wilfredo Sanchez wrote:
>
> > We have +1 from Fred, Ian and a 0 of some flavor from Joshua.
>
> -0 Hesitant but I won't stand in the way.
Same here, -0.
-aaron
Re: [PATCH] Added wrappers to httpd-std.conf.in (fwd)
Posted by Cliff Woolley <jw...@virginia.edu>.
On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Wilfredo Sanchez wrote:
> We have +1 from Fred, Ian and a 0 of some flavor from Joshua.
-0 Hesitant but I won't stand in the way.
Re: [PATCH] Added wrappers to httpd-std.conf.in (fwd)
Posted by Wilfredo Sanchez <ws...@mit.edu>.
OK, so do people really hate the <IfModule> wrappers? Because I
wanna commit it. Votes?
We have +1 from Fred, Ian and a 0 of some flavor from Joshua.
-wsv
Re: [PATCH] Added wrappers to httpd-std.conf.in (fwd)
Posted by Ian Holsman <ia...@apache.org>.
Wilfredo Sanchez wrote:
> I'm for the patch, but I'm the guy that committed this for 1.3.
>
> This makes admin a lot simpler. I want UserDir, I enable the module
> and leave the default config. I don't, I comment out the module. It's
> kinda the point of IfModule, no?
>
> It also means you can use apxs's ability to enable/disable a module
> without crapping out the server.
>
+1 from me as well
makes life SO much easier when you want to unload un-nessecary things
like mod_dir/autoindex from your configuration
> -wsv
>
>
> On Thursday, August 1, 2002, at 02:06 PM, Joshua Slive wrote:
>
>>
>> On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Tim Wilde wrote:
>>
>>> I'm reposting the attached patch yet again, which adds various
>>> <IfModule>
>>> sections to the default httpd.conf to allow proper function without
>>> changes to httpd.conf if various modules aren't enabled. Sent this
>>> twice
>>> within the last two months now without any response. Makes me wonder if
>>> anyone cares that the default config file just plain doesn't work in
>>> many
>>> configurations. This would be an ideal and simple patch to put into
>>> 2.0.40. Patch applies cleanly to docs/conf/httpd-std.conf.in from the
>>> 2.0.39 release.
>>
>>
>> Personally, I have mixed feelings about this patch, which is why I
>> haven't
>> committed it myself. Yes, it does make the default config file more
>> generally useful with different configurations. But it also makes the
>> default config file less of a good example. The <IfModule> wrappers have
>> a real tendency to confuse people, because they get the idea that you
>> MUST
>> place your directives inside them.
>>
>> So, for example, I see people asking
>> "Why does this fail silently with no errors?
>> <IfModule mod_rewrite.c>
>> RewriteEngine On
>> RewriteRule / /elsewhere
>> </IfModule>"
>> The answer is that they don't have mod_rewrite. If they had left out the
>> <IfModule> lines, they would have gotten a useful error message. With
>> them included, they are just confused.
>>
>> The default config file works with the default install. If you modify
>> the
>> default install, you also need to modify the default config. I'm
>> comfortable with that. If you change the installed modules without
>> modifying the default config files, you are asking for confusion.
>>
>> Others may have other opinions, and I have no intention of vetoing this
>> patch.
>>
>> Joshua.
>
>
Re: [PATCH] Added wrappers to httpd-std.conf.in (fwd)
Posted by Wilfredo Sanchez <ws...@mit.edu>.
I'm for the patch, but I'm the guy that committed this for 1.3.
This makes admin a lot simpler. I want UserDir, I enable the module
and leave the default config. I don't, I comment out the module. It's
kinda the point of IfModule, no?
It also means you can use apxs's ability to enable/disable a module
without crapping out the server.
-wsv
On Thursday, August 1, 2002, at 02:06 PM, Joshua Slive wrote:
>
> On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Tim Wilde wrote:
>
>> I'm reposting the attached patch yet again, which adds various
>> <IfModule>
>> sections to the default httpd.conf to allow proper function without
>> changes to httpd.conf if various modules aren't enabled. Sent this
>> twice
>> within the last two months now without any response. Makes me wonder
>> if
>> anyone cares that the default config file just plain doesn't work in
>> many
>> configurations. This would be an ideal and simple patch to put into
>> 2.0.40. Patch applies cleanly to docs/conf/httpd-std.conf.in from the
>> 2.0.39 release.
>
> Personally, I have mixed feelings about this patch, which is why I
> haven't
> committed it myself. Yes, it does make the default config file more
> generally useful with different configurations. But it also makes the
> default config file less of a good example. The <IfModule> wrappers
> have
> a real tendency to confuse people, because they get the idea that you
> MUST
> place your directives inside them.
>
> So, for example, I see people asking
> "Why does this fail silently with no errors?
> <IfModule mod_rewrite.c>
> RewriteEngine On
> RewriteRule / /elsewhere
> </IfModule>"
> The answer is that they don't have mod_rewrite. If they had left out
> the
> <IfModule> lines, they would have gotten a useful error message. With
> them included, they are just confused.
>
> The default config file works with the default install. If you modify
> the
> default install, you also need to modify the default config. I'm
> comfortable with that. If you change the installed modules without
> modifying the default config files, you are asking for confusion.
>
> Others may have other opinions, and I have no intention of vetoing this
> patch.
>
> Joshua.
Re: [PATCH] Added wrappers to httpd-std.conf.in (fwd)
Posted by Cliff Woolley <jw...@virginia.edu>.
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Joshua Slive wrote:
> The default config file works with the default install. If you modify the
> default install, you also need to modify the default config. I'm
> comfortable with that. If you change the installed modules without
> modifying the default config files, you are asking for confusion.
Agreed.
--Cliff
Re: [PATCH] Added wrappers to httpd-std.conf.in (fwd)
Posted by Tim Wilde <tw...@dyndns.org>.
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Joshua Slive wrote:
> Personally, I have mixed feelings about this patch, which is why I haven't
> committed it myself. Yes, it does make the default config file more
> generally useful with different configurations. But it also makes the
> default config file less of a good example. The <IfModule> wrappers have
> a real tendency to confuse people, because they get the idea that you MUST
> place your directives inside them.
The way I see it, you confuse (or perhaps more aptly, annoy) clueful
migrants from 1.3 like myself by leaving them out - we expect those
<IFModule>'s to be there - they're there in the default 1.3 config file,
after all. I figured this as a no-brainer, because it seems to work well
in 1.3.
Tim
--
Tim Wilde
twilde@dyndns.org
Systems Administrator
Dynamic DNS Network Services
http://www.dyndns.org/
Re: [PATCH] Added wrappers to httpd-std.conf.in (fwd)
Posted by Joshua Slive <jo...@slive.ca>.
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Tim Wilde wrote:
> I'm reposting the attached patch yet again, which adds various <IfModule>
> sections to the default httpd.conf to allow proper function without
> changes to httpd.conf if various modules aren't enabled. Sent this twice
> within the last two months now without any response. Makes me wonder if
> anyone cares that the default config file just plain doesn't work in many
> configurations. This would be an ideal and simple patch to put into
> 2.0.40. Patch applies cleanly to docs/conf/httpd-std.conf.in from the
> 2.0.39 release.
Personally, I have mixed feelings about this patch, which is why I haven't
committed it myself. Yes, it does make the default config file more
generally useful with different configurations. But it also makes the
default config file less of a good example. The <IfModule> wrappers have
a real tendency to confuse people, because they get the idea that you MUST
place your directives inside them.
So, for example, I see people asking
"Why does this fail silently with no errors?
<IfModule mod_rewrite.c>
RewriteEngine On
RewriteRule / /elsewhere
</IfModule>"
The answer is that they don't have mod_rewrite. If they had left out the
<IfModule> lines, they would have gotten a useful error message. With
them included, they are just confused.
The default config file works with the default install. If you modify the
default install, you also need to modify the default config. I'm
comfortable with that. If you change the installed modules without
modifying the default config files, you are asking for confusion.
Others may have other opinions, and I have no intention of vetoing this
patch.
Joshua.