Good morning,
OK, I feel like an idiot, because this seems to me like a
straightforward thing, but not only can I not get it to work, I can't
seem to even find information about it. When I search for "apache" and
"named pipe" or "fifo" I keep getting tons of information about making
the logs pipe to a program. I'm sure that's very useful, but it's not
what I'm interested in.
I just want a plain named pipe as a file on the web server. I will
write information to the pipe, and when a web browser accesses the
pipe, it will read the information. Simple, right? But whenever I try
to access the pipe through the web, I get a 403 Forbidden error. Why?
The pipe is readable. I even tried making it 777 and still I get the
error.
I thought maybe I needed to add something to httpd.conf or .htaccess
to get it to read from named pipes, similar to how there's a directive
telling it to follow symbolic links, but I haven't been able to find
anything.
The only reference I was finally able to find was a November 2009 post
here from someone who sounded like he was doing the exact same thing,
but he was getting a blank page instead of a 403, so not sure why his
results were different. He was told he would have to make a
modification to the code to get it to work. Is this still the case, or
has apache been changed in the meantime?
Why is this so difficult, and why aren't more people interested in
doing this? It seems like such a simple thing to do. If I create a
named pipe and write data to it, cat can get the data out, along with
many other programs. So why is apache different? Is it intentionally
trying to avoid reading data from named pipes, or is there some
low-level operating system issue that makes it difficult, which cat
has no problem with because it's part of the shell?
Thank you for any insight!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|