Re: [bug-myserver] bug reports and suggestions

[Giuseppe Scrivano]

Hello,

first of all, thank you for the report.

> first bug,
> sed -i s/MYSERVER_ERROR/MYSERVER_LOG_MSG_ERROR/
> src/connections_scheduler/listen_threads.cpp
> to fix the --enable-ipv6 compiling show stopper.

We recently changed the log manager and some code is still broken.

> second bug,
> compiling with --prefix=/prefix does not have an effect on
> /etc/myserver, /var/log/myserver, and /var/web.
> with DESTDIR=/destdir and --prefix=/prefix, causes
> /prefix/destdir/prefix/var/web not /prefix/destdir/var/web.

It needs to be investigated better, I'll take a deeper look as soon as
possible.

> third bug,
> gnu myserver does not look in $HOME/.myserver but, works with
> executing myserver as a symbolic link in $HOME/.myserver or any other
> path. i did not check if adding that directory to $PATH would had done
> the expected behavior since that would be further hiding the bug.

Do you mean that it doesn't look in $HOME/.myserver for configuration
files?  If so, it is a bug and needs to be fixed.
The myserver executable can be placed in any directory, it will
automatically change the current working directory to its directory.
Running it directly or using a symbolic link will not make any
difference in the configuration files that will be used.

> first suggestion,
> for virtualhosts.xml, if the term, virtual host, is not used properly,
> why not renaming it to hosting.xml and <VHOST> to <HOSTING>/<HOST>?

It is a proper name for HTTP/HTTPS, it is not completely correct with
other protocols, like FTP, where there is not the "virtual host"
concept.  I agree that virtualhosts.xml is not a nice name but I don't
agree that hosting.xml sucks less :)  Do you (or anybody else) have a
better name?

> second suggestion,
> agreeing with debian, the name, myserver, is too generic/vague. since
> gnu myserver is still in a pre-official gnu release stage, i suggest
> renaming to something more catchy or straight-forward.  i could send
> you a list of suggested names. =P

This is going to be a FAQ.  Generic/vague is not proper I think.  At
least "myserver" has a "server" part that gives the idea of what the
software does.  It can't be more specific like MyWebServer, I am sure
you agree it sounds very bad (and the FTP protocol implementation does
too).
Beside technical difficulties (like web domain, change the name in
several places), I personally like this name, it gives the idea that you
own the server and have full control on it, that is not so bad at all
considering how we care about freedom.
How many people here dislike the name?

> third suggestion,
> for myserver.xml and how_to_create_certificates.txt examples,
> server.key and server.pem is better read as privkey.pem and
> cert[ificate].pem.

Right, privkey.pem and cert.perm are without doubts better than
server.[key|pem].

> i thank you all for your contributions and wish you success. bring
> apache real competition!

We are in a phase where any suggestion from users is very helpful.
Thank you again for your comments and advises!  Did you have any other
problem while you were using MyServer?  Do you think that something can
be made easier to use/understand?

Giuseppe