Re: config/1144: Virtualhost troubles.... (fwd)

[Dean Gaudet <dg...@arctic.org>]

The following reply was made to PR config/1144; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Dean Gaudet <dg...@arctic.org>
To: Francis Mouthaud <mo...@freenet.fr>
Cc: apbugs@apache.org
Subject: Re: config/1144: Virtualhost troubles.... (fwd)
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 20:44:13 -0800 (PST)

 Francis I don't think I ever received a response to this question.  But
 maybe I misplaced it.
 
 In 1.2 if you want to use name-based vhosts (which yours are) then they
 all have to have the same address as the "main server".  Generally this
 means the same address as the machine itself has.
 
 vhosts have been completely rewritten in 1.3, and you may want to read the
 docs at http://www.apache.org/docs/vhosts/ to see how the new stuff works.
 There were so many bugs and inconsistencies in 1.1, the 1.2 betas, and the
 1.2 release regarding vhosts that we decided a complete rewrite was the
 best approach. 
 
 Dean
 
 ---------- Forwarded message ----------
 Date: Thu, 18 Sep 1997 14:26:18 -0700 (PDT)
 From: Dean Gaudet <dg...@arctic.org>
 To: Francis Mouthaud <mo...@freenet.fr>
 Subject: Re: config/1144: Virtualhost troubles....
 
 What is the machine's ethernet address?  i.e. what is the ip address
 returned for a reverse lookup on the output of the hostname command? 
 
 Dean
 
 On Fri, 18 Apr 1997, Francis Mouthaud wrote:
 
 > Dean Gaudet wrote:
 > > 
 > > Are all of your servers the same IP address?
 > 
 > yes 194.250.152.254
 > 
 > > 
 > > Does the htdocs/manual/vhosts-in-depth.html documentation help you at all?
 > > 
 > > Dean
 > 
 > I think that I already saw them but nothing new...
 > Actually I saw that there is a little difference in the new versions of 
 > apache because we can provide the port number in the virtualhost tag...
 > anyway, I have to enter the IP address (and not the name) of the machine
 > and I get something unstable....
 > 
 > I do NOT understand what's happening... may be a misconfiguration...but
 > why is it working with a previous (beta!!) release...?
 > 
 > thanks for your response
 > 
 > Francis
 > 
 >