unsubscribe
On 4/28/13 8:00 AM, nginx-request@nginx.org wrote:
> Send nginx mailing list submissions to
> nginx@nginx.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> nginx-request@nginx.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> nginx-owner@nginx.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of nginx digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. adding header/footer to gzip'ed html files
> (Constantine A. Murenin)
> 2. Re: nginx-1.4.0 (itpp2012)
> 3. Re: nginx-1.4.0 (Jim Ohlstein)
> 4. basic_auth for parts of uwsgi (Christoph Egger)
> 5. Re: basic_auth for parts of uwsgi (Francis Daly)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 10:41:06 -0700
> From: "Constantine A. Murenin" <cnst++@FreeBSD.org>
> To: nginx@nginx.org
> Subject: adding header/footer to gzip'ed html files
> Message-ID: <517C0DB2.2060907@FreeBSD.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R; format=flowed
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm trying to see ways in which OpenGrok could be optimised with nginx.
>
> One of the ideas I have is using nginx to serve the /xref/ pages,
> instead of them going through OpenGrok each time. OpenGrok (the
> indexer) pre-generates the body of the /xref/ pages, and stores the
> resulting html as .gz files, but those files don't have any
> header/footer, and require to be presented within "<pre>" and "</pre>",
> which OpenGrok (the webapp) then adds on the fly.
>
> Would it be possible to use `add_before_body` and `add_after_body`
> (http://nginx.org/docs/http/ngx_http_addition_module.html), together
> with `gzip_static always`
> (http://nginx.org/docs/http/ngx_http_gzip_static_module.html), together
> with `gunzip on`
> (http://nginx.org/docs/http/ngx_http_gunzip_module.html), to replace
> passing /xref/ to OpenGrok (the webapp)?
>
> Technically, gzip / deflate is a stream encoding, so, supposedly,
> there'd be no need to decode and re-encode the .gz files, but some
> special handling will probably still have to be performed nonetheless.
>
> I presume a scenario as above would not currently work (but I might as
> well be wrong); however, does this sound like something that's
> potentially interesting, and not overly difficult and complicated to fix
> up? Or would it be simpler to amend all the /xref/ pages for all of
> them to redundantly include the needed header and footer?
>
> Cheers,
> Constantine.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 15:59:59 -0400
> From: "itpp2012" <nginx-forum@nginx.us>
> To: nginx@nginx.org
> Subject: Re: nginx-1.4.0
> Message-ID:
> <44c2370a8e0951e19601b15db621c57d.NginxMailingListEnglish@forum.nginx.org>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Hello Maxim,
>
> Can you tell us the status with the branches ?
> Is 1.3 now the new stable ? (what is then the status of 1.2 ?)
> Is 1.4 development ?
>
> Should all 1.2 users upgrade to 1.3 ?
>
> Posted at Nginx Forum: http://forum.nginx.org/read.php?2,238606,238681#msg-238681
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 16:03:51 -0400
> From: Jim Ohlstein <jim@ohlste.in>
> To: "nginx@nginx.org" <nginx@nginx.org>
> Subject: Re: nginx-1.4.0
> Message-ID: <37689803-8C4D-4555-99A7-5906332FAF50@ohlste.in>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> On Apr 27, 2013, at 3:59 PM, "itpp2012" <nginx-forum@nginx.us> wrote:
>
>> Hello Maxim,
>>
>> Can you tell us the status with the branches ?
>> Is 1.3 now the new stable ? (what is then the status of 1.2 ?)
>> Is 1.4 development ?
>>
>> Should all 1.2 users upgrade to 1.3 ?
>>
>>
> http://nginx.org/
>
> Jim Ohlstein
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: http://mailman.nginx.org/pipermail/nginx/attachments/20130427/ec4f78e0/attachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 13:05:37 +0200
> From: Christoph Egger <christoph@christoph-egger.org>
> To: nginx@nginx.org
> Subject: basic_auth for parts of uwsgi
> Message-ID: <87a9oi9apq.fsf@hepworth.siccegge.de>
> Content-Type: text/plain
>
> Hi!
>
> I have the following problem:
>
> I'm running a uwsgi application using nginx on /. I would like to add
> authentication for /foo/ and /bar/. However neither
>
>> location / {
>> include uwsgi_params;
>> uwsgi_pass unix:/run/uwsgi/app/something/socket;
>> }
>>
>> location /foo/ {
>> auth_basic "LOGIN";
>> auth_basic_user_file "/tmp/test/";
>> }
>>
>> location /bar/ {
>> auth_basic "LOGIN";
>> auth_basic_user_file "/tmp/test/";
>> }
> nor
>
>> location / {
>> include uwsgi_params;
>> uwsgi_pass unix:/run/uwsgi/app/something/socket;]
>>
>> location /foo/ {
>> auth_basic "LOGIN";
>> auth_basic_user_file "/tmp/test/foo";
>> }
>>
>> location /bar/ {
>> auth_basic "LOGIN";
>> auth_basic_user_file "/tmp/test/bar";
>> }
>> }
> Seem to pass /foo/ and /bar/ to the wsgi socket and I can't find a
> solution on the interwebz.
>
> Christoph
>

_______________________________________________
nginx mailing list
nginx@nginx.org
http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx