Apache Site: www.apache.org
Release: 1.3.3 (Released 9th October 1998)
Apache 1.3.3 is the current stable release. Users of Apache
1.2.6 and earlier should look at upgrading to this version.
Read Guide to
1.3.3 for information about changes between 1.2 and
Most bugs listed below include a link to the entry in the
Apache bug database where the problem is being tracked. These
entries are called "PR"s (Problem Reports). Some bugs do not
correspond to problem reports if they are found by
These bugs have been found in 1.3.3 and will be fixed in the
Because of the major differences between Windows and Unix,
these are separated into bugs which affect Windows systems
only, and other bugs (which may affect Windows as well). Unix
users can ignore the bugs listed in the Windows section.
If a script cannot be run because the interpreter specified
on the initial #!
line did not start correctly, log the interpreter filename
and the reason it did not work.
Doing a nmake clean
did not clean the files created for mod_rewrite. PR#3100.
More problems with the way that paths starting with drive
letters and UNC designations where handled. PR#2555,
Add port to Concurrent PowerMAX OS.
Certain error conditions (such as when a handler name was
defined but no handler was available with that name) would
result in the wrong error status.
Patches for bugs in Apache 1.3.3 will be made available in
the apply_to_1.3.3 subdirectory of the patches
directory on the Apache site. Some new features and other
unofficial patches are available in the 1.3
patches directory. For details of all previously reported
bugs, see the Apache bug
database and known
bugs pages. Many common configuration questions are
answered in the Apache FAQ.
A module is now available to add authoring support to Apache.
This module is mod_dav, and is
not part of the Apache project (it is also under a different
license, the "LGPL" which places restrictions on the sale of
modified versions). This extends Apache to support the IETF
Authoring and Versioning (DAV) protocol currently under
development. This is a standardized protocol for remote
authoring of web pages. This is similar to the what is
currently provided by editors such as FrontPage which use
proprietary protocols. DAV providers more than just remote
authoring. It also handles full site management, versioning
and other web-based data management.
At present, there are no DAV clients available. However
Microsoft has a
press release announcing support for WebDAV in future
products. Also now that the server side is available for a
popular server it might encourage the development of
The monthly Netcraft server
survey shows that Apache is by far the most commonly used
web server on the Internet. Now another survey shows figures
for server usage amongst just the largest US corporations.
server survey looks at only web servers owned by US
corporations with turnovers in excess of US$10 million per
year. This is a total of 53,265 sites (compared to Netcraft's
Amongst the large US corporations, Apache is used on about
36% of sites, Microsoft on 28%, and Netscape on 19%. The
share held by Apache is fairly unchanged since the first
survey in March 1998, while Microsoft has increased and
Netscape decreased. They also analysed the results by company
turnover, which shows that Apache is far more widely used in
lower revenue companies. Since this survey does not look at
companies below a US$10 million turnover, this explains why
it shows Apache with just a 36% market share. However even
amongst high turnover companies, Apache is the most widely
used server in all turnover bands except for companies with
over US$1 billion turnover.
This week saw the apparent "leak" of an internal Microsoft memo about the
threat of open source software (OSS) to Microsoft. This memo
was published on the web by Eric Raymond, an open source
proponent known for his "
The Catheral and the Bazaar" essay on source development
models. He called it Halloween
I and annotated it with his comments. (There is also a
second, less controvesial, meo called Halloween II, and an
apparent response by Microsoft Netherlands, available from The Halloween
Various news sources report that Microsoft has confirmed the
memo to genuine. For example, Wired.com reported on
MS: Open Source is Direct Threat.
The memo, if real, gives an apparent insight into how
Microsoft regards the development of an active open source
software movement, with widely used and accepted products
such as Apache and Linux. It says that Microsoft regards
these products as real and credible threats to Microsoft's
own business, and notes that Microsoft must compete against
not just the products, but the open source process itself
which leads to the development of highly reliable and widely
used software. The main way to target open source, the memo
suggests, is to extend the underlying protocols so that they
are proprietary, or to integrate the protocols very closely
with proprietary architecture (such as an operating system).
This they call "decommodising" the protocols, since the
modified protocol is no longer open for use by any
Reaction to the memo has been varied. Some people have
suggested that is was convenient for a Microsoft memo which
shows the threat to Microsoft to be release at the same time
that the software company is being investigated for
monopolistic tactics by the US government. Another viewpoint
published on the PBS television stations' web site in
Where is Eleanor Roosevelt When We Need Her? Why the Linux
World is Upset and Shouldn't Be argues that free software
should only be concerned about the product, and not about
market share. That is an interesting opinion, since Apache
was never developed with an aim of becoming a widely used
server: it was just going to be a accurate implementation of
the HTTP protocol in free souce to allow for extensions by
users. However the if open source developers looked only at
following the protocols they may find that the ground is
moved away from under them if companies (such as Microsoft)
were to make protocols proprietary or bypass the open