Rainer, Thank you, I didn't know about those new OSes :)
I'm using fedora 8 for now. I tried to use sudo adding the http user in the sudoers list, but even though my cgi perl script launches the sudo apachectl graceful command, I get the following error message in the apache error.logs file: (13)Permission denied: make_sock: could not bind to address [::]:80 (13)Permission denied: make_sock: could not bind to address 0.0.0.0:80 no listening sockets available, shutting down Unable to open logs Thank you for your help Franck > Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 19:57:04 +0100 > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: users@tomcat.apache.org > Subject: Re: jk2 vs mod_jk and mod_proxy_balancer > > frannack Guimard schrieb: > > Rainer, > > > > Thank you for your input. I send you another e-mail but it looks like you > > didn't get. I tried to use apachectl graceful after updating my > > worker.properties files. The only problem is that it must be done as root > > (because of the port 80). So my cgi perl script running in apache to > > automatically update the worker.properties does not work when I add a > > system command to gracefully restart apache. I even tried to add the httpd > > user (nobody) for example in the sudoers file as NOPASSWORD, but it did not > > work either. > > > > Any suggestion would be much appreciated, I really need to make that work a > > way or an other to manage my zillion tomcat instances :) > > > > Thank you. > > > > Franck > > apachectl graceful uses signals to communicate with the httpd processes. > So if the user doesn't have enough rights to end th signals this fails. > Especially if you start httpd as root, you need to do restart/graceful > as root too. > > Some modern OSes allow configurations for non-root processes to bind to > privileged ports (below 1024, e.g. 80). > > So if you need to do a graceful you either > > - need root privileges > - must use a high port (and run as non root) > - use an OS that allows to give non-root the rights to bind to the low > port (Solaris 10 e.g. does) > - look at "sudo", that allows to precisely define, which command non > root users are allowed to run as root > > Regards, > > Rainer > > > >> Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 17:16:53 +0100 > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> To: users@tomcat.apache.org > >> Subject: Re: jk2 vs mod_jk and mod_proxy_balancer > >> > >> frannack Guimard schrieb: > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> I just looked at mod_jk2. I was looking for a way to add programmatically > >>> a worker to the balancer with mod_jk or mod_proxy_balancer, but couldn't > >>> find a way. And then I saw in the mod_jk2 documentation: > >>> 1. Edit workers2.properties. Add a new channel. If you want, also add a > >>> worker.ajp entry - > >>> but this is optional > >>> 2. Access the /jkstatus page or triger reloading with a program. You > >>> should see the > >>> new channel displayed in the status page, and requests should start going > >>> to the new tomcat instanceDoes anyone knows if it's working with apache > >>> 2.2.x. Can we do the same with mod_jk or mod_proxy_balancer? (how) > >>> > >>> Thank you. > >> For mod_jk you would have to add the worker to the config file and do a > >> web server restart. Using apachectl graceful will be sufficient. > >> > >> Most config items are dynamicaly manageable, but not the addition of a > >> worker. It is an interesting feature, but will not be realized in mod_jk > >> 1.2.x. > >> > >> Concerning mod_jk2 be warned, that there is noone left working on it > >> since quite several years now. As a consequence we no longer recommend > >> using it. > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> Rainer > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _________________________________________________________________ Watch “Cause Effect,” a show about real people making a real difference. Learn more. http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/MTV/?source=text_watchcause
