[STATUS] (httpd-docs-2.0) Wed May 31 23:52:30 2006

Apache HTTP Server 2.0 Documentation Status File.
Last modified: $Date: 2004-11-21 09:35:21 -0500 (Sun, 21 Nov 2004) $

For more information on how to contribute to the Apache Documentation
Project, please see http://httpd.apache.org/docs-project/

This document contains only documentation issues related to 2.0 alone.
For general documentation issues, or those that relate both to 2.0 and
to future versions, please see the same file in httpd-2.0 HEAD.

Invitation from UTM Malaysia.

[STATUS] (httpd-docs-2.0) Wed Jun 7 23:49:30 2006

Apache HTTP Server 2.0 Documentation Status File.
Last modified: $Date: 2004-11-21 09:35:21 -0500 (Sun, 21 Nov 2004) $

For more information on how to contribute to the Apache Documentation
Project, please see http://httpd.apache.org/docs-project/

This document contains only documentation issues related to 2.0 alone.
For general documentation issues, or those that relate both to 2.0 and
to future versions, please see the same file in httpd-2.0 HEAD.

Re: Problem in Windows-specific documentation for Apache 2.2.x

Alex Smith wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> In the Windows section of the 2.2.x documentation, the commands that it
> gives are wrong. For example, it says to install Apache as a Windows
> service you should run this from the bin directory:
> 
> apache -k install
> 
> The apache executable does not exist. The correct executable to run
> would be this:
> 
> httpd -k install
> 
> All of the commands should be httpd instead of apache.

Having not installed Apache on Windows for *many* moons, I have to take
your word for this. The last time I used Apache on Windows, the binary
was called 'apache.exe', but that was ... well, certainly before 2.2
came on the scene.

Thanks for the note. Preparing a patch.

--
Rich Bowen
rbowen <at> rcbowen.com

Re: Problem in Windows-specific documentation for Apache 2.2.x

Rich Bowen wrote:
> Alex Smith wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> In the Windows section of the 2.2.x documentation, the commands that it
>>> gives are wrong. For example, it says to install Apache as a Windows
>>> service you should run this from the bin directory:
>>>
>>> apache -k install
>>>
>>> The apache executable does not exist. The correct executable to run
>>> would be this:
>>>
>>> httpd -k install
>>>
>>> All of the commands should be httpd instead of apache.
> 
> Having not installed Apache on Windows for *many* moons, I have to take
> your word for this. The last time I used Apache on Windows, the binary
> was called 'apache.exe', but that was ... well, certainly before 2.2
> came on the scene.

Ok, verified and patched. Thanks for the bug report.

--
Rich Bowen
rbowen <at> rcbowen.com

Re: svn commit: r413218 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/howto: auth.html.en auth.xml

On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 03:04:23AM -0000, rbowen <at> apache.org wrote:
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=413218&view=rev
> Log:
> /usr/local/apache/apache should just be /usr/local/apache

Should we be even more consistent, and use /usr/local/apache2 ? 
I'm not sure :)

--

-- 
Colm MacCárthaigh                        Public Key: colm+pgp <at> stdlib.net

Re: svn commit: r413218 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/howto: auth.html.en auth.xml

Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 03:04:23AM -0000, rbowen <at> apache.org wrote:
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=413218&view=rev
>> Log:
>> /usr/local/apache/apache should just be /usr/local/apache
> 
> Should we be even more consistent, and use /usr/local/apache2 ? 
> I'm not sure :)

Yes, we probably should, even though it's just an example.

--
Rich Bowen
rbowen <at> rcbowen.com

Re: Problem in Windows-specific documentation for Apache 2.2.x

> Alex Smith wrote:
> 
>>In the Windows section of the 2.2.x documentation, the commands that it
>>gives are wrong. For example, it says to install Apache as a Windows
>>service you should run this from the bin directory:
>>
>>apache -k install
>>
>>The apache executable does not exist. The correct executable to run
>>would be this:
>>
>>httpd -k install

Yes; thank you for these observations, and entirely my bad for not resyncing.
We appreciate your report.

Of course httpd.exe was to match all-other-platforms; also the change to
c:\program files\apache software foundation\ is almost seven years overdue,
and couldn't really happen during a subversion .x bump.  2.2 was our earliest
opportunity, I'll try to remember to make these changes to trunk/ of docs
now that our stable branches have their own stable homes.

Race conditions and outdated documentation

I need a little assistance, in the hopes that someone can save me a lot
of research time.

The document in question is:
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/stopping.html#race (just the "Appendix"
part).

It refers to "Prior to 1.2b9" and "too late to make 1.2". It seems
profoundly unlikely to me that these remarks are useful or true anymore,
but I want to be completely sure of that before I axe them. Can anyone
tell me which parts of that Appendix are still true, and which ones are
irrelevant historical notes. I'm very much in favor of discontinuing
support for folks who are using 1.2. 

--
Rich Bowen
rbowen <at> rcbowen.com

Re: Problem in Windows-specific documentation for Apache 2.2.x

William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>> Alex Smith wrote:
>>
>>> In the Windows section of the 2.2.x documentation, the commands that it
>>> gives are wrong. For example, it says to install Apache as a Windows
>>> service you should run this from the bin directory:
>>>
>>> apache -k install
>>>
>>> The apache executable does not exist. The correct executable to run
>>> would be this:
>>>
>>> httpd -k install
> 
> Yes; thank you for these observations, and entirely my bad for not
> resyncing.
> We appreciate your report.
> 
> Of course httpd.exe was to match all-other-platforms; also the change to
> c:\program files\apache software foundation\ is almost seven years overdue,
> and couldn't really happen during a subversion .x bump.  2.2 was our
> earliest
> opportunity, I'll try to remember to make these changes to trunk/ of docs
> now that our stable branches have their own stable homes.

Will, I made the changes yesterday. It should all be good now. Just that
the docs on the live site haven't been updated. I need to paw through
the archives and remind myself how to do that, as I've been out of the
loop for a while.

--
Rich Bowen
rbowen <at> rcbowen.com