httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dean Gaudet <>
Subject Re: [PATCH] Server version OS/2 console banner fix
Date Fri, 08 May 1998 18:58:42 GMT
If the module author doesn't deem their module worth mentioning, then
that's the end of the story.  If the server admin wants to mention it they
can always recompile the code.

MSIE briefly had an option to change the User-Agent in one of the betas on
the Mac.  MUCH CHAOS ENSUED as folks started pretending to be this that or
the other.  It was removed. 


On Fri, 8 May 1998, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:

> Marc Slemko wrote:
> > 
> > The server string isn't for "webmasters to add comments about what they've
> > done"!  That isn't the point of it, and encouraging such things is
> > foolish.
> You're missing my point again.  I was typing colloquially.  The httpd
> binary is not necessarily the entirety of a Web server - functionality
> external to it may be part of what make a server what it is.  If someone
> has enhanced its site in some significant server-related way beyond what
> httpd provides, they should be able to note that fact in the version string.
> Or take another case - modules for which no source is available/provided,
> and that have an effect worth mentioning.  Should the Webmaster have to
> wait around until the authors get around to enhancing it to use
> ap_add_version_component()?  If he can compile, he could hack the
> SERVER_SUBVERSION string - but then that's broken if the module in
> question is being dynamically loaded, and isn't at the moment.  And if
> he can't compile, he's out of luck altogether.
> #ken	P-)}
> Ken Coar                    <http://Web.Golux.Com/coar/>
> Apache Group member         <>
> "Apache Server for Dummies" <http://WWW.Dummies.Com/

View raw message