Apache doesn't display any sites after

[IT_Architect]

I have a new server and a new DA install by DA. I restored the DA users from the old DA server to the new sever using the reseller backup. I can type in the IP address of the server and it says Apache is functioning normally. If I put the server's address and /webmail, all of the mail is there. However, when I put a sites address in my hosts file and try to browse to the site by name, it does not find the page.

What would cause that?

[floyd]

Domain?
Ip address?

You have to realize that at least for me I do not know most answers off the top of my head. I do diagnostics to figure it out. I can help most of the time. But I have to be able to do the same thing you are doing. Most of the time there are several possibilities. I do not want to name off all the possibilities that may send you in the wrong direction. I want to do my best to send you in the right direction the first time.

If you give me the domain and ip address then I can try what you are trying. For me it will either work or not. The direction the solution is in is first based upon that. Its a diagnostic flow chart.

[IT_Architect]

I rolled the server back to an earlier snapshot and restored the domains from reseller backups The dedicated IP sites work and the non-dedicated sites do not. There apparently is a vhost problem.

[floyd]

Did you share the ip addresses?

[IT_Architect]

Did you share the ip addresses?When I restored the domains I selected shared server for them and they use that address in the DNS. I didn't specifically do anything else.

[floyd]

Again without the domain and ip I cannot do any more.

[IT_Architect]

Again without the domain and ip I cannot do any more.I didn't understand what you meant in your first reply. Check your PM.

[localhost]

cd /usr/local/directadmin/custombuild
./build rewrite_confs

[IT_Architect]

cd /usr/local/directadmin/custombuild
./build rewrite_confsThat didn't fix anything, but it was helpful. The first was the http accept filter. Once that was fixed, I ran it again and it told me that the virtual hosts were missing for the domains, which is true. After that I entered a new domain. It still doesn't work though. I'm building a new one now.

[floyd]

I didn't understand what you meant in your first reply. Check your PM.

If you don't want to share the domain and ip publicly then you will be very limited in the help you receive. In fact this will be my last response to this if you don't tell us publicly what the domain and ip is.

However I will tell you that the ip you gave me in the PM does not work.

[IT_Architect]

However I will tell you that the ip you gave me in the PM does not work.
A little history:
- I'm doing 64 bit BSD install. I've installed it fine for awhile and even on ports.
- The last two I decided to do standard installs without ports because with ports, the DA CP updates would break things. They went fine. The few rashes I had, I reported to DA what I did to work around them.
- This one, which is also a slightly newer version of DA, wouldn't install without error, so I decided to have support do it, and let me know what they did to get it installed.
- After doing user restores from another server, I noticed that only the dedicated IP sites were working which would be either vhost or a http 1.1 problem.
- I assumed it worked before the restore but I didn't check before I did the user restores so I rolled the server back to the snapshot of the install and put a domain in by hand. The vhosts didn't work then either.
- Support did not tell me what they did to get it to install, so I asked. They didn't remember, but said probably just the php patch method. I did a new server using that method, and this time with 7.1, which is what the license says instead of 7.2, but it shouldn't matter. It didn't matter. When it was finished, it had the same vhost problem that the DA install had.
- Then I put the DA install back on line and that's when I posted here. In the mean time I made up a ports-based non-DA server and that went together fine is is running now.
- Next I decided in order to move the project forward, I should put together the server for a couple of reasons. One, is the DA install didn't work, and two, I would always be living in terror of something going wrong with the server and not being able to fix it in a timely manner. It would be the only server we have that we didn't understand. Thus, I built an new server, and when I got to the DA install part, I took the DA server off-line, which is where things are now. For the test localhost mentioned, I took the one I was working on off-line and put the DA install back on line. That put a little finer point on where the problems were.

Thanks!

[IT_Architect]

Going through the compile I get the php error, but when doing the ./build all d I get the follolwing error:

"/usr/bin/ld: /usr/local/mysql/lib/mysql/libmysqlclient.a(libmysql.o): relocation R_X86_64_32 can not be used when making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC
/usr/local/mysql/lib/mysql/libmysqlclient.a: could not read symbols: Bad value
*** Error code 1

Edit: The way around this error is to install 5.0. The MySQL 5.1 choice is invalid with FreeBSD 64. You need to do that from ports if you want 5.1.

[floyd]

We have strayed a long way from a domain and an ip address not working.

[IT_Architect]

We have strayed a long way from a domain and an ip address not working.It may appear that way, but that is not the case. The exact problem with the install was uncovered with certainty when we ran: ./build rewrite_confs as advised by localhost. I tried the normal fixes that DA uses and achieved the same result. I decided to try and come up with up with an install procedure that would allow a 64 bit FreeBSD install without using the customary fix-ups after the install, as documented in the knowledgebase. I was successful. As a side benefit, DA works perfectly now and the virtual host issues are gone thanks to everyone here. I will post this in a "How To". Using this procedure I am confident that we won't need to fear performing control panel updates.

[floyd]

Then why does the ip address you gave me to check still not work?

[IT_Architect]

Then why does the ip address you gave me to check still not work?The first one was the DA install that had real domains on it that we thought we were ready to roll with. This is a new install with a couple of domains hand-entered as were the others we tried afterward. I'll PM you the new ones.

[floyd]

I'll PM you the new ones.

No nevermind. I don't know why you asked a question here if you are not patient enough to wait for the answer. Don't waste my time.

[localhost]

could you show this :

ifconfig -a

[IT_Architect]

No nevermind. I don't know why you asked a question here if you are not patient enough to wait for the answer. Don't waste my time.Well, I already did before I received your reply. You implied you wanted to see it working, and I sent the addresses. Do as you wish. The problem was solved from this thread.

[floyd]

I will tell you one more time. The ip's you have given me do not work.

I did as you said in the last PM and nothing works. Not the ip's, not the domains.

Now post the information here publicly and see if others get the same results as I do. Else stop wasting our time. There is absolutely no reason not to post the domains and ip's here.

Your primary problem is that the ip's you are trying to use do not work. Forget all the apache configs and everything else. Get the ip's to work first and then we can move on from there.

But I am serious, I will just have to put you on my ignore list is you don't post publicly the information we need. We have been going over this subject for years with different users. It is very tiring.

Please read this (http://homepages.tesco.net/~J.deBoynePollard/FGA/dont-obscure-your-dns-data.html)


The problem was solved from this thread

No it has not because it still does not work for the general public. Nobody from the outside can get to those ip addresses.

[IT_Architect]

The IPs work. Please put me on your ignore list.

[IT_Architect]

could you show this :

ifconfig -aICQed it to you.

[floyd]

The IPs work.

No they don't. They do not respond to ping requests or http requests from remote testing facilities.

[IT_Architect]

could you show this :I will be shutting down this server shortly to take a snapshot, backup, and take a swing at getting it all to work with MySQL 5.1 before posting a How To. I don't expect to be successful as DA mentioned to me a couple months ago that they had not been successful due to a problem with the packages. The only way I've gotten 5.1 to work thus far is by using ports.

Thanks!

[IT_Architect]

No they don't. They do not respond to ping requests or http requests from remote testing facilities.They ping fine from here, and the pinging of those addresses has always worked. The vhosts were the only problem. Perhaps localhost can give them a ping and post whether he can ping them or not.

Thanks!

[floyd]

Deleted ip's

[IT_Architect]

Hi Floyd,

I see the problem! What I sent you is not what I'm using. I accidentally made a mistake typing the message with the IP addresses that I sent you originally. Starting the second message by copying from the original message didn't help matters. My mistake huge. However, you are well aware that I PMed you because I did not want the addresses on a public forum. Thus, the address mistake actually turned out to be unanticipated providence since I learned quite inexpensively that you cannot be trusted with information shared in confidence, an unfortunate fact that you, yourself, have made evident to all by your actions.

[floyd]

First of all domains and ip addresses are NOT confidential information. By their very nature they are public. If you take a few minute and read many of the threads in this forum you will see how we, you know the people who are trying to help YOU, fight against this crap all the time. I can be trusted with confidential information when I am actually given confidential information.

Second, me posting what I did revealed the mistake you made. So it was good that I did post it. Me posting it helped who? YOU. If I had not posted it then we would still be arguing back and forth about whether the ip's work.

Whether you know it or not the very first thing we have to establish is whether the ip's work. Only now we can move on from there except that you are still not willing to give out the information we need to actually help you.

Obscuring dns and domain information is the number one time waster on this forum. It prevents people from actually helping you.

Look at the number of posts I have made throughout the years. Yet I have probably asked less than 10 questions here. There is a reason for that. You should learn to listen to ones who may know more than you. After all that IS why you asked your question here.

You can call me an arrogant know it all if you want. But I am guessing you still do not have it working and you are not willing to listening to ones who could help. And as a courtesy I am deleting the ip's in my previous post. But do not think for a moment that displaying your ip's has anything at all to do with security or anything of the sort.

[IT_Architect]

I can be trusted with confidential information when I am actually given confidential information.You've proven otherwise here.


It revealed the mistake you made. So it was good that I did post it. Me posting it helped who? YOU.The problem was solved before that. Read the thread. Localhost was the one on this thread who had an idea that surfaced exactly where the problem was. That occurred well before I realized I had type the wrong IP's in the PM.


Look at the number of posts I have made throughout the years. Yet I have probably asked less than 10 questions here. There is a reason for that. You should learn to listen to ones who may know more than you. After all that IS why you asked your question here.You are tearing down your own image by making statements like that. This is not a student vs teacher venue. It's common knowledge that one person cannot compete with the knowledge and experience of a group. While not the case here, I and many others often leverage the synergy of a group even when they may have a solution in hand. The multiple viewpoints and experiences of other people most often produce a better solution than any individual idea.


But I am guessing you still do not have it working and you are not willing to listening to ones who could help.I don't understand why you would make such a statement. It's working fine, and I thanked everyone on this thread when it did.

Everybody has the ability to help other people in some area. I've waded through a lot of threads here over the years. I've learned from some of your posts. However, it has not escaped my attention that you've also pushed a lot of buttons that didn't need pushing. You debase yourself in the minds of others when you do. You won't always have the best solution for every problem and nobody would lay an impossible expectation like that on you or anyone else. Input is appreciated no matter where it comes from. I simply say these things for your own benefit.

[nobaloney]

This thread has denegrated into an argument between two posters and without indicating which side I'm on, I've decided to close it so as not to waste time of others who may look at it each time it's updated. Please do not restart this discussion on another thread unless you've got a response which will be helpful to the DirectAdmin community at large. Thank you.