Slashdot Mirror


Why I Hate the Apache Web Server

schon writes "Today's the last day of ApacheCon Europe; There was a hilarious presentation entitled 'Why I Hate the Apache Web Server' for anyone who has expressed frustration with the various inconsistencies and nuances of the Internet's favourite config file. And yes, it includes a comparison to Sendmail."

6 of 558 comments (clear)

  1. Why I hate PDFs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    OK, so this is a PDF file that looks like a Powerpoint presentation and it is about how much he hates Apache. *head explodes*

    Here is a html version, I doubt it will stay cached for very long though.

  2. A 666KB PDF... by Virak · · Score: 5, Funny

    Coincidence? I think not!

  3. Comic Sans is..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    NOT A FONT. ok? Repeat after me, Comic Sans Is Not a Font! In 1995 Microsoft released the font Comic Sans originally designed for comic book style talk bubbles containing informational help text. Since that time the typeface has been used in countless contexts from restaurant signage to college exams to medical information. These widespread abuses of printed type threaten to erode the very foundations upon which centuries of typographic history are built. While we recognize the font may be appropriate in a few specific instances, our position is that the only effective means of ending this epidemic of abuse is to completely ban Comic Sans. http://bancomicsans.com/home.html

  4. Re:Those PDF's again... aaargh by cortana · · Score: 5, Informative

    Put this in your userContent.css:

    a[href$=".pdf"]:after {
    font-size: smaller;
    content: " [pdf]";
    }

    I also find the following useful:

    :link[target="_blank"]:after, :visited[target="_blank"]:after,
    :link[target="_new"]:after, :visited[target="_new"]:after
    {
    font-size: smaller;
    content: " [new]";
    }

    a[href^="javascript:"]:after
    {
    font-size: smaller;
    content: " [shite]";
    }

  5. Re:Those PDF's again... aaargh by Wolf+nipple+chips · · Score: 5, Informative
    For anybody willing to make comments on the content instead of the form, here it is :

    Why I Hate The Apache Web Server
    Lessons learned from IRC - Rich Bowen
    Note: Opinions expressed are those of our users, as expressed on IRC. The goal of this talk is to make people aware of things which those "outside" see as problems, but which we tend to be so used to that we don't see at all. If I get carried away, feel free to throw fruit.

    Why do I hate thee? Let me count the reasons.
    - Fragile
    - Confusing
    - Missing stuff that EVERYONE asks for

    Fragile
    - Breaks easily. Small changes have big results

    Options +Indexes Includes MultiViews
    Options Indexes Includes Multiviews

    The first of these forbids Indexes. The second one permits them. Huh?

    Disclaimer
    "But that's not supported syntax!"
    Then it should throw an error and break, not do something utterly unexpected. Unfortunately, several major Linux distros ship with this broken-but-almost-looks-right configuration, or variants thereof

    Example 2
    Vhosts ... wow, don't get me started

    # My IP address is 192.168.1.200
    NameVirtualHost *:80
    <VirtualHost 192.168.1.200:80>
    ...
    </VirtualHost>

    That vhost is silently ignored. Yeah. That's intuitive.

    Discussion
    "But the docs say not to do that!" Yes, I know. I wrote that line in the docs. It's still really irritating.

    Another ...

    Require Valid-user

    Unlike every other Apache config setting, "Require" is case sensitive, so that's not valid valid_user would be nice too. Oh, and "Require User" and "Require Group" don't work either.

    Missing (asked daily on IRC)
    - Can I set a variable and use it later?
    - Can I have an if/else syntax?
    - Can I please reload my configuration file without restarting my server?
    - How do I make ServerTokens return "Bob's Handy Dandy HTTP Server"? (Yes, this is silly, but it would sure shut a lot of people up finally.)

    What else? mod_imap: how many of you have actually used that module? How many of you who are not committers know what it does? Why is it on by default? Come on folks. Netscape added client-side image maps in 1995!

    And while we're on the topic mod_cern_meta: Who even knows what this module does? For the record, yes, I do. But I doubt any of you have ever used it.

    CONFUSING
    NumServers ServerLimit ThreadLimit ThreadsPerChild StartThreads StartServers MaxSpareThreads MinSpareServers MaxSpareServers MinSpareThreads MaxClients MaxThreadsPerChild MaxRequestsPerChild MaxRequestsPerThread ThreadStackSize
    Oh sweet God make it stop

    What's that directive called?
    RLimitMem, RLimitCPU, RLimitNProc? I have to look these up every time. Of course, since they don't seem to do what the docs say, maybe that's not a bad thing.

    Am I running out of time yet?
    - Why do I have to set up two separate vhosts for http://example.com/ and https://example.com/ when they're the same website?
    - Why are dynamic vhosts so darned hard?
    - Why doesn't the default configuration file match the "security tips" document?

    mod_rewrite
    I probably don't need to say anything more than just "mod_rewrite". But I will: "Voodoo" and "... flexibility of sendmail". The docs practically scream "GO AWAY!"

    RewriteMap
    Nice, but have you ever found an actual useful example? Oh, and the example script for generating db map files doesn't actually work. (Note: Paul fixed this 2 weeks ago. See httxt2dbd)

    How about this?
    If I want these two aliases to work, I have to:

    Alias /foo/bar

    --
    Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool.
  6. And this is one of the WORST parts of OSS by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The attitude that so many have of "If you don't like it, fix it yorself!" That's a very harmful attitude to take, it's very abrasive and turns many people off to OSS.

    I mean you have to remember, that most of the people in the world CAN'T, even if they want to, because they aren't coders. The majority of the population, well over 90%, does not know how to program. It's stupid to say they should learn how to. The whole point of specialization of labour is that peopel dont' ahve to do everything. Coders code, other peopel use what they make.

    Then, of the few that can code, most don't have the time. It's a serious undertaking to make major changes to make major changes to a codebase, and it's really har dwhen it's not yours. You have to spend a lot of time just in learning what the fuck is going on and hwo it all works, before you can start making changes. Well, most coders can't do that, espically for every product they happen to use. There a fixed amount of time, and most of us have most of it taken up by more important things (like a paying job, family time, housework, etc).

    Then, even if you do have the ability and time, it's not always easy. I'd not the guy that gave this presentation is an Apache developer, so he IS putting his money where his mouth is. It's just pretty clear that making tha fixes isn't some little 1 hour coding job, it's some major work that needs to happen.

    So really, people who want to push OSS shouldn't take this isntantly hostile "Well fix it yourself!" attitude. Problems should be listend to, and should be fixed when possible. When it's not, the reasons should be explained why, and the person should be helped to figure out how ot work with what they have as best as possible.

    Oh, and having configured both IIS and Apache, IIS wins hands down. Easy GUI config, options do what you think they do, plenty of context sensitive documentation. That's not to say it's a better web server, and sure as hell not more secure, but when it comes to configuration, that's just no contest.