World: r3wp
[!Cheyenne] Discussions about the Cheyenne Web Server
older newer | first last |
Dockimbel 16-Feb-2009 [3881x2] | Error message: it looks like there something wrong with one of the 'on-* handler in %app-init.r |
When you renamed the webapp, did you update all the config options in %httpd.cfg accordingly? | |
Robert 16-Feb-2009 [3883] | Webapps: What is this and how does it work? |
Oldes 16-Feb-2009 [3884] | From faq: A webapp is a directory in the webspace which is protected by an authentication cookie. It is specified inside the httpd.cfg, where there is a sample "testapp". |
Robert 16-Feb-2009 [3885x2] | Well... what is "webspace"`? Is a webapp useable by all virtual hosted domains? And what do I do with it? |
And how is the authentification cookie made, sent, ...? | |
Oldes 16-Feb-2009 [3887] | It's something like framework... if you check the httpd.cfg, you can see something like: webapp [ virtual-root "/testapp" root-dir %www/testapp/ auth "/testapp/login.rsp" ;debug ] When you that access the server with starting with the virtual-root, it's proccessed by Cheyenne using the %www/testapp/app-init.r file where are several handlers which are processed by the process. So you don't have to for example think how to update session time etc. |
Robert 16-Feb-2009 [3888x4] | Not sure I understand all this (yet). Let me start with a simple thing. :-) Are there are any RSP examples to look at? I just need to get started and see how it works. |
Would a simple file containing: <% now %> work? | |
I can see that cheyenne processes this page via the revers-proxy setup but nothing is delivered. The browsers hangs and shows the progress bar. | |
Ok, I need to use PRINT to return something. Found it. Hey Doc, give us some wiki logins to collect all these "documentaition" snippets. | |
Dockimbel 16-Feb-2009 [3892x4] | A webapp is just a container for a bunch of RSP scripts working together and protected from outside (you need to log in to get access). There's some events that can be used (defined in %app-init.r). There's also support for /public and /private sub-folders. |
Btw, if you don't know how to build RSP scripts, you should first have a look at ASP or JSP online documentation, so you can get the concept and usage. RSP API can be found on http://cheyenne-server.org/docs/rsp-api.html | |
RSP examples, there's several examples in the %www/ folder. | |
If anyone wants to contribute to Cheyenne's wiki, just send me a private message and you'll get an account. | |
Graham 16-Feb-2009 [3896x2] | ok, found the problem. I had some initialization stuff in the app-init.r which referred to the old direcctory. |
Is there any way the app-init could be placed inside the httpd.cfg? | |
Dockimbel 16-Feb-2009 [3898x2] | As a design principle, I don't want to have code inside the config file. Why would you need that? |
Anyway, you could use request/config in 'on-* events if needed to remove static paths. | |
Graham 16-Feb-2009 [3900] | So I won;t forget about the app-init.r file :) |
Robert 17-Feb-2009 [3901x5] | I'm now using Cheyenne as reverse proxy with lighttpd. Works great. All RSP requests are forwarded to Cheyenne. |
I run several domains as virtual domains in lighttpd. And I have one document root for Cheyenne. The idea is to be able to add the same RSP page (like a shopping cart) to severl domains without having to duplicate the RSP code pages. | |
Is this possible? Does Cheyenne know anything about the domains document root? | |
My directory layout is like this: cheyenne (containing all RSP pages) domains domain1 domain2 domain3 ... | |
If a request to an RSP page via domain2 comes in, I would like to be able to reference directories inside the domain2 directory. | |
Oldes 17-Feb-2009 [3906x2] | Why there is used 'launch for encaped version and 'call for the rest? |
in uni-engine.r is used: launch*: func [cmd [string!]][ call join form to-local-file system/options/boot [" -s " cmd] ] There must be -sq not just -s | |
Graham 17-Feb-2009 [3908] | 'launch stopped working in 2.7.6 I think |
Dockimbel 17-Feb-2009 [3909] | You're sure? Don't remember reading that in the 2.7.6 changelog? |
Oldes 17-Feb-2009 [3910] | without the -q it's impossible to run the server as a background. |
Dockimbel 17-Feb-2009 [3911x2] | Launch is what Cheyenne needs. But it doesn't work in Core (but works ok in /Pro which is the minimal base for the encap versions), that's why I use the CALL workaround to make sure it will work on all REBOL flavours. |
I hope that LAUNCH would be fully enabled in REBOL v2.7.7, I don't see the point in keeping such limitations. | |
Graham 17-Feb-2009 [3913x2] | Yes, I reporteed issues with 'launch. Gabriele said to use 'call instead. |
I see I reported other issues with launch http://www.rebol.net/cgi-bin/rambo.r?id=4205& That one is makred TBD | |
Dockimbel 17-Feb-2009 [3915] | Just testing with 2.7.6, looks like LAUNCH is only working with Encap. "Feature not available..." for all reb* binaries. |
Oldes 17-Feb-2009 [3916] | How safe it's nowif I would use call from task? For example to do image processing? |
Graham 17-Feb-2009 [3917x3] | Is launch/quit working at all?? It wasn't working for 2.7.5 |
Maybe it was for 2.7.5 and it got fixed for 2.7.6. I know at one stage I had to replace all instances of launch in my encapped code, and use 'call instead. | |
Doing a search .. looks like I was having that conversation with Gabriele about the linux SdK and launch in 2006. | |
Dockimbel 18-Feb-2009 [3920] | Oldes: Graham is using CALL from RSP scripts to do image processing IIRC. I never used CALL from RSP myself, so I can't tell. It seems to me that it would be faster/safer to wrap an image processing DLL than launching a new process for each new request. Using CALL from a RSP is like dropping to CGI, you're loosing most of RSP speed benefits. |
Graham 18-Feb-2009 [3921] | I have one page of my hylafax application that calls imagemagick to convert a tiff to png so it can be viewed in the browser ... |
Oldes 18-Feb-2009 [3922] | Ok.. then we should write a wraper for imagick, because that's what I want to use as well. |
Robert 18-Feb-2009 [3923x4] | Thinking about web-app appliances. Not sure if this idea alreaday exists but IMO a good thing to think about. If I have a RSP based web-app (for example my super-cool-all-you-need-shooping-cart system) that I would like to sell it would be nice to bundle cheyenne and all the RSP stuff into one package. The user just installs it, sets up a simple reverse-proxy and has everything up & running. |
IMO this would be a killer feature for Cheyenne. | |
We can't expect people to change their existing web-server. We can't expect them to install Rebol interpreter, create new CGI setup etc. But we can expect people to install something on their system, add a little config stuff to the existing setup and have a cool web-app up& running. | |
Most web-apps or modules are just to all-or-nothing. I just want a simple thing but get a bunch of stuff I don't want to use but I'm forced to. | |
Pekr 18-Feb-2009 [3927x2] | Very interesting idea. My easy-cgi tries to serve as a "package", which can be just copied to any cgi-enabled site. I am at very beginning, not really trying to do more than simple cgi stuff, sqlite, sessions .... |
If Cheyenne as a whole could work this way, I might consider using it. Other than that, I can't easily replace Apache at hosting location .... | |
Robert 18-Feb-2009 [3929x2] | Deploying the RSP stuff in an "encapped" way would be nice too. So just one file including cheyenne and all RSP stuff. |
The main problem I have with a lot of the available tools is, that integrating several of them into one solution is far from easy. There is no loose coupling possible. You need PHP version XYZ with module ABC and libc version IJK etc. getting all this to work togehter is horrible. It's fragile and hence a nightmare to scale or operate. | |
older newer | first last |