nginx-0.7.42

[Jim Ohlstein]

It should be easy to test. Define fastcgi_param SERVER_ADDR as a constant (say your real IP) in your fastcgi_params file and see what's passed in phpinfo. 

BTW, a similar  bug appeared before and I pulled my hair out over it. Igor did subsequently fix it in 0.7.20.  It's in the changelog. 

Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

-----Original Message-----
From: mike <mike503 at gmail.com>

Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 12:26:10 
To: <nginx at sysoev.ru>
Subject: Re: nginx-0.7.42


i would think it's nginx's fastcgi, not php's fastcgi.

nginx's told to fastcgi_param SERVER_ADDR the same, and the version of
nginx changed, nothing else - PHP didn't, etc. so the problem from
that angle is localized to something on the nginx side.


On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Merlin <merlin at mahalo.com> wrote:
> I would guess that it will be stable when Igor releases 0.8.x.
>
> However, did PHP fastcgi recently break? I am referring to the incorrect
> server name as 0.0.0.0 - maybe it isn't broken, just saying, perhaps
> possible issues like this is why.  Also, more importantly, new features have
> been introduced that are still going through iterations (the try_files
> directive, specifically).  Generally, this is what staves off
> "stable-ness".  This is why debian packages are so old in the stable branch,
> btw - they do not update package versions or add new packages except for
> security concerns - this is what makes it stable (rarely changing), as
> opposed to volatile (often changing) system.
>
> That said, many of us use the development branch in production, as really a
> recompile of the binary is no problem when you can switch the processes with
> zero downtime :).  NginX is one of the better programs out there to have on
> the cutting edge; Igore is from what I've seen very careful in what he adds
> or changes and it always seems to be improving, with fewer bugs being
> introduced than fixed (which is awesome!).
>
> - Merlin
>
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 10:49 AM, Walter Cruz <walter.php at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> good catch.
>>
>> Why 0.7 is not considered stable?
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 2:16 PM, mike <mike503 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> How about when it will be deemed stable (been running it fine ever
>>> since I decided to use nginx ...) and consider 0.6.x legacy instead?
>>> :)
>>>
>>> 2009/3/17 Athan Dimoy <foxx at freemail.gr>:
>>> > Any idea when 0.7xx new features will be backported to stable tree
>>> > (0.6)?
>>> >
>>> > Thanks.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> []'
>> - Walter
>> waltercruz.com
>
>