Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Apache Software

Apache 2.0.47 Released 26

Posted by michael from the .0.01-better-than-ever dept.
Quicksilver31337 writes "The Apache Software Foundation and the Apache HTTP Server Project are pleased to announce the tenth public release of the Apache 2.0 HTTP Server. This Announcement notes the significant changes in 2.0.47 as compared to 2.0.46. This version of Apache is principally a security and bug fix release."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apache 2.0.47 Released More

Apache 2.0.47 Released

Comments Filter:

  • Temporal denial of service (Score:5, Funny)

    by ModernCelt ( 129965 ) on Thursday July 10, 2003 @10:14AM (#6406969) Homepage
    Certain errors returned by accept() on rarely accessed ports could cause temporal denial of service, due to a bug in the prefork MPM.

    Heh. Temporal denial of service... sounds like a Star Trek plot device.

  • Apache security documentation (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward

    http://www.cgisecurity.com/webservers/apache/ [cgisecurity.com]
  • I am still using 1.3 on my production systems but 2.0 seems to be quickly getting to the point where it could be safely used on a mission critical boxen. I am sure I will use it as soon as 2.0 is the default version on Debian stable. It is really great this story is on the front page of Slashdot, even though Slashdot itself is still using 1.3.26, which is a shame, since 2.0 seems to be ready already, and there is 1.3.27 available. I think we should all say thanks to Ben Laurie, Jeff Trawick, Yoshioka Tsuneo

    • Re:This is really great news. (Score:5, Informative)

      by Airwall ( 39346 ) * on Thursday July 10, 2003 @12:32PM (#6407808) Homepage
      Yes, it's "getting" there, but with mod_perl 2 still being incomplete, PHP still not recommending Apache 2 for production and various other smaller niggles, it seems to be taking a lot of the supporting projects time to catch up. When I re-did my own webserver a couple of weeks back, I really wanted to use Apache 2, but getting Mason working started to do my bonce, frankly. So I went back to 1.3.
      • ...but getting Mason working started to do my bonce, frankly.

        wtf does that mean?
        • Bonce: British slang for head.

          Expressions such as "it's doing my nut" or "it's doing my head in" mean "it's so confusing, difficult or obfuscated that I am no longer willing to work on it."

          Sorry, it really was Brit slang. But hey, now you know.
      • I agree. I tried an upgrade to apache 2 at the same time I was testing RH 8 (ugh) and experienced some odd httpd behaviour on sites running php. I kept my production server at apache 1.3 and RH 7.3 because that combo is like butter.
      • Recently I installed LiveJournal [livejournal.com]'s server code [livejournal.com] on a slackware 8 box. The standard version of apache that comes with slackware didn't have mod_perl in it, so I downloaded the newest httpd, which at the time was 2.0.46. I downloaded the appropriate mod_perl as well. This combination compiled fine, but I couldn't use it. LiveJournal is written for the old mod_perl, which doesn't work with apache 2.0.x, and therefore LiveJournal wouldn't work with what I had. I had to rip out apache 2.0.46 and fall back to
      • I have no problems with the Apache (2.x) in RH9 and my PHP-site.

        FWIW
    • It's just that the mod_perl code must run on 1.3, since mod_perl on 2.0 isn't there yet.

      images.slashdot.org has run 2.0 since before the original 2.0 release announcement was posted. See the Netcraft page [netcraft.com].
  • I wouldn't be such a whiner but I run Apache on Windows 2000 and you have to actually uninstall it before you can install the latest version. This only takes a minute, but I'm always worried that the installer will decide to hose my conf! I really wish I could just install a patch.
    • If it does you could make a dreaded BACKUP!

      Seriously, it's one text file, gimme a break.
      • I have a better backup system than you could ever dream of. However, I still don't see why the option to upgrade was removed from the MSI install package- just to inconvenience me? What if it decides to blow away the /icons directory too? It takes time to restore those images from tape.

        • Re:Dammit, I just installed 2.046! (Score:4, Funny)

          by Lao-Tzu ( 12740 ) on Thursday July 10, 2003 @05:33PM (#6409973) Homepage

          I have a better backup system than you could ever dream of.... It takes time to restore those images from tape.

          I dream of a backup system where data can be restored instantly, and an infinite number of revisions of an infinite amount of data can be stored on a device the size of my little toe. And these little-toe sized devices are so cheap that I run off a hundred copies of them every night, and store them in different places across the world. And they're secu...

          I think you get the idea. I can dream of a lot better than tape.

          • They're called snapshots and most middle-to-big servers have them. Big honking servers like NetApps ($100k+) and even the little NAS boxes from Iomega (~$4k) have them. Blow something away? No big deal, just go into the .snapshot directory and pull out data up to two weeks old. I imagine it's all in the works for some upcoming version of a Linux filesystem the same way software raid and journaling were once only found in the realm of the big servers.
  • the Slashdot story on the release of 2.0.48 tomorrow...

    cLive ;-)
  • does PHP work with this thing natively yet? that is what is stopping me.

Slashdot Top Deals

"A car is just a big purse on wheels." -- Johanna Reynolds

Close