Return-Path: owner-new-httpd
Received: by taz.hyperreal.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id GAA03859;
 Mon, 28 Aug 1995 06:19:08 -0700
Received: from luers.qosina.com by taz.hyperreal.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP
 id GAA03854; Mon, 28 Aug 1995 06:19:03 -0700
Received: from guru.qosina.com (guru.qosina.com [206.64.187.50]) by
 luers.qosina.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA03354 for
 <new-httpd@hyperreal.com>; Mon, 28 Aug 1995 09:16:03 -0400
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 09:16:03 -0400
Message-Id: <199508281316.JAA03354@luers.qosina.com>
X-Sender: awm@qosina.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 2.1.1
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: new-httpd@hyperreal.com
From: "Aram W. Mirzadeh" <awm@qosina.com>
Subject: Re:  HELP!
Sender: owner-new-httpd@apache.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org


No, he actually went as far as +s httpd with nobody owner and try to run it.
It will never work that way, no matter what OS he's got.

<Aram>


At 09:43 AM 8/28/95 +0200, you wrote:
>> Port 80 is a privileged port; you can't bind to it under Unix unless you're
>> running as root --- it's an OS restriction, and has nothing to do with Apache
>> in particular.  However, the crucial thing is that the server must be *run*
>> by root --- who owns the file is irrelevant.
>
>But some versions of linux are not that strict about it. If you logged in, in
>s-user mode and upgrated to m-user and than down to a user; you would still be
>able to bind a <1024 port. Long fixed though. Ask the guy what kernel
version he has.
>
>Dw.
>
>
--
Aram W. Mirzadeh, MIS Manager, Qosina Corporation
http://www.qosina.com/~awm/, awm@qosina.com