httpd-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rodent of Unusual Size <Ken.C...@Golux.Com>
Subject Re: VitualHost problem finally fixed
Date Wed, 31 Jul 2002 10:00:48 GMT
Admin wrote:
> In order for this to work, as the docs say, and give as examples for...
> you must first also place a virtualhost block for the main
> server config, the very first virtualhost section, then all
> your other subdomains and/or domains are placed "AFTER" that.
> This is the important part left out of the docs,
> and why so many people have trouble with it.

I'm unclear on what 'this' is.  In order for *what* to work?
For you to serve according to the global config as well as
the vhost sections?

> You also must have your BindAddress directive, set as " * "

That's rubbish.  Not only is BindAddress deprecated, but I've
never used it, nor had to, in the six years I've been running
virtual hosts with Apache.

> and a FQDN  (Fully Qualified Domain Name) set as your "ServerName"
> in the uppermost global config.

That's also rubbish in general, but it may be true in the specific
case with which you're working -- but since I'm not sure of the
latter, I'll just say that my global ServerName settings are all and I serve vhosts to the Internet just fine.

> Also no one else has ever mentioned this very important
> fact on this list, at all either. Wonder WHY that is?  eh?
> makes you stop and think, doesn't it? Do these people who claim to
> know this or that, REALLY know what they say, or are they just
> stuck up? selfish people?  You decide....

The Apache documentation is imperfect; I don't think anyone will
dispute that.  As the person who started the project to improve
it, I certainly won't.  It started as developers writing docco
for themselves and other developers, not for end-users.  There
are a lot of unstated assumptions and word-of-mouth aspects
that could use recording -- but that'll only happen if the
VOLUNTEERS who work on the documentation get motivated to do

I stress that word for a reason.  This is the Apache USER to USER
discussion list.  You're not talking to a formal, funded, tech-support
department when you post here, but to other people who are willing
to share what they've learned from experience and (probably) want
to learn more.  If they point you to some documentation, it quite
likely is because either a) that's where *they* found the answer
when they encountered the same problem, or b) the documentation
says more-or-less what they would if they had the time and the
desire to give a long explanation.  If they've steered you to
inappropriate documentation, oh well -- tell them you didn't find
it helpful, rather than dissing as a group the people willing to
reply at all.

I have a very hands-off policy concerning this list, but if even
*one* person, who has provided useful help to others, unsubscribes
due to being insulted by your note, you will have been directly
responsible for making this a less-useful forum than it was.  And
driving contributors away is not behaviour that I will tolerate.

So, Admin Kompukit, I ask you to do two things:

1. Please describe, or point to a message where you describe, what
   it is you were trying to accomplish that required the settings
   you describe.  I have forwarded this note to the docco project
   so the people there can see about updating the appropriate pages
   to correct the deficiencies you found.  They'll need to know what
   was deficient, though, so they know how to describe it, hence this
   request for more info.
2. Please *do* go back and read any responses directed to you and
   consider whether the senders were trying to impress you with their
   knowlegde (a character flaw I know I personally sometimes display),
   or genuinely help you.
#ken	P-)}

Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Golux.Com/coar/
Author, developer, opinionist      http://Apache-Server.Com/

"Millennium hand and shrimp!"

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message