From e881953651398e5d91cc7de9fdc451a9ba5640d1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Marc Slemko Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 06:34:23 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Fix FAQ entry on problems with POST, plus a few cleanups. The old entry is extremely misleading, and answering a Q that isn't really FA, and I see someone posting somewhere every week who tries this to fix their "method not allowed" problems. PR: Obtained from: Submitted by: Reviewed by: git-svn-id: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk@80861 13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68 --- docs/manual/misc/FAQ.html | 52 ++++++++++++++------------------------- 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-) diff --git a/docs/manual/misc/FAQ.html b/docs/manual/misc/FAQ.html index a9f794ca17..3b8798c827 100644 --- a/docs/manual/misc/FAQ.html +++ b/docs/manual/misc/FAQ.html @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@

Apache Server Frequently Asked Questions

- $Revision: 1.110 $ ($Date: 1998/03/27 01:56:34 $) + $Revision: 1.111 $ ($Date: 1998/04/11 06:34:23 $)

The latest version of this FAQ is always available from the main @@ -134,8 +134,8 @@

  • Can I increase FD_SETSIZE on FreeBSD?
    • -
  • Why do I keep getting "access denied" for - form POST requests? +
  • Why do I keep getting "Method Not + Allowed" for form POST requests?
  • Can I use my /etc/passwd file for Web page authentication? @@ -964,31 +964,17 @@
    • -
  • - Why do I keep getting "access denied" for form POST - requests? +
  • + Why do I keep getting "Method Not Allowed" for + form POST requests?

    - The most common cause of this is a <Limit> section - that only names the GET method. Look in your - configuration files for something that resembles the following and - would affect the location where the POST-handling script resides: -

    -

    -

    -
    <Limit GET> -
        :     -
    -
    -

    -

    - Change that to <Limit GET POST> and the problem - will probably go away. Better yet, remove the - <Limit> and </Limit> lines - altogether unless you're specifically trying to limit by - method (GET, PUT, et cetera). If - you don't have a <Limit> container, the - restrictions apply equally to all methods. + This is almost always due to Apache not being configured to treat the + file you are trying to POST to as a CGI script. You can not POST + to a normal HTML file; the operation has no meaning. See the FAQ + entry on CGIs outside ScriptAliased + directories for details on how to configure Apache to treat the + file in question as a CGI.

    • @@ -2143,10 +2129,10 @@

    - RedHat Linux versions 4.x (and possibly earlier) rpms contain + RedHat Linux versions 4.x (and possibly earlier) RPMs contain various nasty scripts which do not stop or restart Apache properly. These can affect you even if you're not running the RedHat supplied - rpms. + RPMs.

    If you're using the default install then you're probably running @@ -2155,12 +2141,12 @@ the problems.

    - If you're using a custom built Apache rather than the RedHat rpms + If you're using a custom built Apache rather than the RedHat RPMs then you should rpm -e apache. In particular you want the mildly broken /etc/logrotate.d/apache script to be removed, and you want the broken /etc/rc.d/init.d/httpd (or httpd.init) script to be removed. The latter is - actually fixed by the apache-1.2.5 rpms but if you're building your + actually fixed by the apache-1.2.5 RPMs but if you're building your own Apache then you probably don't want the RedHat files.

    @@ -2250,12 +2236,12 @@

    These are symptoms of a fine locking problem, which usually means that - the server is trying to use a synchronisation file on an NFS filesystem. + the server is trying to use a synchronization file on an NFS filesystem.

    Because of its parallel-operation model, the Apache Web server needs to - provide some form of synchronisation when accessing certain resources. - One of these synchronisation methods involves taking out locks on a file, + provide some form of synchronization when accessing certain resources. + One of these synchronization methods involves taking out locks on a file, which means that the filesystem whereon the lockfile resides must support locking. In many cases this means it can't be kept on an NFS-mounted filesystem. -- 2.40.0