Received: by taz.hyperreal.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id QAA27316; Sat, 20 Jul 1996 16:54:22 -0700 Received: from niobe.c2.net by taz.hyperreal.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA27310; Sat, 20 Jul 1996 16:54:19 -0700 Received: (from sameer@localhost) by niobe.c2.net (8.7.5/CSUA) id QAA07675 for new-httpd@hyperreal.com; Sat, 20 Jul 1996 16:54:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199607202354.QAA07675@niobe.c2.net> Subject: Re: 1.1 configuration questions To: new-httpd@hyperreal.com Date: Sat, 20 Jul 1996 16:54:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: from "Mark Shuttleworth" at Jul 18, 96 09:16:28 am From: sameer X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 ME8a] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-new-httpd@apache.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@hyperreal.com I really hate saying bad things about people, especially a competitor, but I can't let this question redirect be posted without a comment. fwiw: thawte gives me a really bad feeling, kind of slimy. We had an agreement back when he wasn't selling in the US to work on added compatibility and cooperative marketing, etc., etc. Yet just two weeks ago (or was it one week) thawte announces on the apachessl-users@c2.net mailing list that they're selling in the US and that Ben's patches totally suck. (Even though Ben's patches theoretically "suck", his server has 2 installations according to netcraft and I think ben and I have about 5000.. =) Having tried working in a cooperative manner with Thawte and then hearing that announcement after our agreement really made my opinion of this guy fall to the floor. I was the one who convinced him to release source. If I didn't do that, then my product would be the only commercial ssl server in the us with available source. simply put: I don't think thawte is doing things in the spirit of cooperation. > Hi all > > I'm writing a web based conf manager, and need some clarification on the > configuration system 1.1 uses. > > First, are and the same from a directive's point of > view? IOW, will any and all directives that work in work in > , and are their no directives that work in but not > ? > > Second, is there a definitive list of directives that are affected by > ? > > Third, can I mix and match between auth, auth_db and auth_dbm? For > example, can i use AuthDBMGroupFile with AuthUserFile? If I have: > > AuthUSerFile users > AuthDBUserFile users.db > > does the second directive replace the first, or are both checked? > > Thanks very much, > Mark > > -- > Mark Shuttleworth > Thawte Consulting > > > -- Sameer Parekh Voice: 510-986-8770 Community ConneXion, Inc. FAX: 510-986-8777 The Internet Privacy Provider http://www.c2.net/ sameer@c2.net