httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Randy Terbush <>
Subject Re: How about mixing BindAddress and VirtualHost???
Date Sat, 03 Feb 1996 17:20:51 GMT
> Cliff Skolnick writes:
> > Well, BindAddress was ment for people that wanted a different 
> > sever/servers running for addresses.  They could be different UID and 
> > stuff that virtual host directives can't provide.
> I understand how and why Apache got into the current situation,
> but the fact remains that if you want six VirtualHosts on one uid
> and another six on another uid then you'll have to run seven server
> instances instead of two.

Ideally, specifying uid/gid for the VirtualHost would be the best
solution IMO. One lead parent process forking children under specified
UID. This would solve the SetUID debate. This would also have the added
side effect of allowing CPU usage accounting on a per UID basis.

View raw message