On 14-Apr-09, at 4:57 AM, André Warnier wrote:
So would you like to try again ?
Sure. I'll make it dead simple for you: Why does this happen? sh-3.2# apachectl -S[Tue Apr 14 04:53:49 2009] [warn] NameVirtualHost *:80 has no VirtualHosts
VirtualHost configuration:
wildcard NameVirtualHosts and _default_ servers:
*:80 is a NameVirtualHost
default server gam (/private/etc/apache2/users/rich.conf:31)
port 80 namevhost gam (/private/etc/apache2/users/rich.conf:
31)
port 80 namevhost localtest (/private/etc/apache2/users/
rich.conf:55)
port 80 namevhost vp (/private/etc/apache2/users/rich.conf:63)
port 80 namevhost if (/private/etc/apache2/users/rich.conf:75)
port 80 namevhost hq (/private/etc/apache2/users/rich.conf:87)
port 80 namevhost hco (/private/etc/apache2/users/rich.conf:
95)
port 80 namevhost gam (/private/etc/apache2/users/rich.conf:
31)
port 80 namevhost localtest (/private/etc/apache2/users/
rich.conf:55)
port 80 namevhost vp (/private/etc/apache2/users/rich.conf:63)
port 80 namevhost if (/private/etc/apache2/users/rich.conf:75)
port 80 namevhost hq (/private/etc/apache2/users/rich.conf:87)
port 80 namevhost hco (/private/etc/apache2/users/rich.conf:
95)
Syntax OK Observation (again, making it dead simple for you): 1. no virtualhosts 2. 13 virtualhosts 3. Syntax OK So 0 == 13. Also, 0 == 13 is "OK".Conclusion: Problems Most developers, have limited patience with misleading software. From Wikipedia:
"A document (noun) is a bounded physical representation of body of information designed with the capacity (and usually intent) to communicate."
Do we have to go into the assumption of that this communication is to be proactive? So take this wonderful idea, apply it to the Observations
Bug as submitted, or horribly bad documentation.Or would you rather me ask a question that doesn't shed light on issues? Kind of like "only behave the way we wish"? Then why have a list? You want approval? Get a dog. I'm here because things are not clear. Yes, it's a list for users. Users are not developers, hence the difference in lists. Hence the need for documentation, to take users into a space for having the need for such lists. Pretty simple, don't you think? Most areas where you offer a service, you minimize things so that they are not misleading, as they apparently are here. See the example above.
I have little patience for you. I'm sure the above information is completely OK by you, but that would only shed light on the real issue of most open source software, which is accompanied by questionable technically written documentation. So yes, the documentation is horribly written. If you can find 2.2 documentation that sheds light on this, which I've spent the better part of 2 days reading, then please point it out. Documentation is about understanding, which it has not provided. So yes, it goes into the bug reporting system as a bug, as it's not performing as expected, as defined by the docs. If it found that the performance is as expected by the developers, yet the documentation doesn't provide insight, then the documentation needs to be fixed. That, is as much a part of apache as the server itself.
And be nice. Rich in Toronto ...now go get on your bike --------------------------------------------------------------------- The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project. See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info. To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx " from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|