[Resolved] PHP Builder broken?

[trex005]

okay... before every once in a great while PHP builder would display it's pages as source... however it seems to have gone from once every 50 pages or so... to once every 4-5... it is getting quite annoying. Is this a known issue (I'm assuming with their headers) or does anyone know what's up?

[planetsim]

Might want to read this (http://phpbuilder.com/board/showthread.php?s=&threadid=10268579)

[codeDV]

I fail to see the point of that thread. The admins and mods appear to be ignoring it. Is it becuase they don't know how to fix it or just cannot be bothered.

This site used to be a resource for myself - now its nothing but a torment. Either way it would be nice if someone could post an announcment to tell us what is going on and if the problem will be fixed in the near future. Until then I won't be sing the site and I suspect that many other members are doing the same.

[trex005]

admittedly, it deters me a bit.... though, I have been making an effort to hang around a bit the past little while... I enjoy helping people! :)

[piersk]

Originally posted by codeDV
I fail to see the point of that thread. The admins and mods appear to be ignoring it. Is it becuase they don't know how to fix it or just cannot be bothered.

Geez, what is your problem? Moaning about it on here ain't gonna solve anything. The mods can't do anything about it, and as far as I am aware the admins are looking into it.

[stolzyboy]

moderators are just that, moderators... removing bad posts, refereeing flame wars, etc...

we have NOTHING to do with the coding/administration of the site.

[Elizabeth]

Yeah, hitting that "refresh" button every once in a while sure does take a lot out of ya.

If that small annoyance is enough to deter someone from taking full advantage of the breadth and depth of knowledge available at PHPBuilder, and the sense of community that comes along with it, then so be it. Sheesh I wish that was all I had to worry about in my life - whether or not the http codes were showing up at PHPBuilder. Fortunately for me, that's way down on the list. :)

[codeDV]

Originally posted by piersk
Geez, what is your problem? Moaning about it on here ain't gonna solve anything. The mods can't do anything about it, and as far as I am aware the admins are looking into it.
I'm sorry to moan, but I used to like this site. I used to find it useful and could help other people to. But my refresh finger is now too tired. Surely the problem isn't that complex :( I am a member of other Jupiter Media sites and they don't have the same problems. I just think it would be nice if one of the Admins could gives us an update and a time limit.

[stolzyboy]

Originally posted by codeDV
I'm sorry to moan, but I used to like this site. I used to find it useful and could help other people to. But my refresh finger is now too tired. Surely the problem isn't that complex :( I am a member of other Jupiter Media sites and they don't have the same problems. I just think it would be nice if one of the Admins could gives us an update and a time limit.

if it's NOT that complex... tell them what the problem is...

and btw, F5 will refresh as well

[codeDV]

Originally posted by stolzyboy
if it's NOT that complex... tell them what the problem is...

and btw, F5 will refresh as well
Don't you get the source code dumped in the browser too. It ahppenes to me about every other request I make to the site.

[stolzyboy]

Originally posted by codeDV
Don't you get the source code dumped in the browser too. It ahppenes to me about every other request I make to the site.

i realize what the problem is... but from what i've heard, it's not a code problem, but "something" with the webserver causing it to spit out closing body and html tags, which is in turn freaking it out...

so, if you have a solution to it... great!

until then... you'll just have to refresh a couple times a day...

btw, i've noticed it happens way less in firefox than IE

[Elizabeth]

Originally posted by stolzyboy
btw, i've noticed it happens way less in firefox than IE Ditto for me... maybe once in 30 times or so? Maybe less?

[AstroTeg]

I'm going to chime in here. I posted in the feedback forum in the thread already in progress. From the look of it, that thread was started in Feb 2004. No updates from the admins or mods until this thread.

With other forums I participate on, its usually good taste to have a mod go through to an admin since usually the mods are picked by the admins (or at least assigned by them). By complaining to the mods, the hope would be they have a lot more say with the admin (maybe even know them personally - depends on the board) and would work with them and the users on getting the problem solved. Better yet, the mods might even know what the problem is saving the admins some email maybe since they had worked with other users having this problem. Otherwise, we can all email the admins. What email addresses do you recommend sending them notices to?

Worse yet, this is "phpbuilder". A site for sharing all things PHP related, which tends to be a lot of web type stuff. It doesn't seem to be in good taste when a PHP driven site focused on promoting PHP doesn't seem to be running to well.

I try not to complain about the service, especially when its free. But a problem that's been around for 7 months without a satisfactory answer and a response from the mods of "hit refresh and deal with it" doesn't seem to be very supportive of the site itself.

[stolzyboy]

it's NOT a PHP deal... it's a webserver deal... and the ADMINS DO know!!!

[AstroTeg]

Originally posted by stolzyboy
it's NOT a PHP deal... it's a webserver deal... and the ADMINS DO know!!!

Its understandable its not a PHP problem. The problem is the server that's having issues is hosting phpbuilder.com, which promotes a language used for building web sites. First opinions still count and one might get the wrong impression about PHP if they come here first...

[Elizabeth]

Originally posted by AstroTeg

I try not to complain about the service, especially when its free. But a problem that's been around for 7 months without a satisfactory answer and a response from the mods of "hit refresh and deal with it" doesn't seem to be very supportive of the site itself. I'm sorry if I gave the impression of being unsupportive of the site- I am very supportive of this site. Which is why it's perplexing to me why someone would stop coming here to reap the wonderful benefits it offers because of (IMO) a trivial glitch. Obviously some people view this glitch as more than trivial, and they are entitled to that opinion. As I said before, if it causes someone to stop coming here then so be it. I, however, was suggesting that perhaps we could all be a little more forgiving and not worry so much about the little things. I know that someone somewhere is working on it, and that's good enough for me. It's out of my "worry" box as it were. Granted, 7 mos. is a long time, but I suspect other more pressing issues have taken precedence over this problem. I doubt that the good folks at Jupiter Media have been sitting back twiddling their thumbs.

Then again, that JStarkey fellow... now he's a complete slacker ;)

[trex005]

it's perplexing to me why someone would stop coming here to reap the wonderful benefits it offers because of (IMO) a trivial glitch. Obviously some people view this glitch as more than trivial, and they are entitled to that opinion.
The problem is, it seems tempermental. some days I can go without it at all and have 50 page views... other days it is 3/4 of the time (which can get really frustrating. I however being a professional programmer COMPLETELY sympathize... There are times where I have to say.. look I'm sorry that this product is not working for you the way it is intended, but at the moment I have much more critical issues I need to resolve, (like getting fed) and additionally, I guess they are having trouble reproducing the bug, (though it does seem that it is very reproducable) and when I can't reproduce a bug in my job... there is nothing I can do. period... doesn't matter how much I want to., I have had a case where this dragged on for weeks (and thousands of attempts at reproducing) before I was ever able to pin it down and those people PAY ME.... this is FREE ...

anywho in summary... I REALLY feel the frustration... but I REALLY sympathize too!

[stolzyboy]

i absolutely feel that it is NOT reproducable... in the sense that it pops up at NO particular time...

i am also a web developer, as are many of us here... some more than others... and if the help/answers/questions are still here, i can live with this problem til it's resolved

[jstarkey]

Originally posted by Elizabeth
Granted, 7 mos. is a long time, but I suspect other more pressing issues have taken precedence over this problem. I doubt that the good folks at Jupiter Media have been sitting back twiddling their thumbs.


7 months is about the amount of time we've been discussing the new "old" server we were going to "possibly" be getting. The only conclusion that we can find is that it's just the way old versions of everything that the server is running on. We're planning to upgrade to PHP5 soon, maybe something in the server libs and the new version will fix the issue.

Also, I have yet to be able to reproduce the problem on Windows XP Home/Mozilla/IE/Firefox or on RHEL/KRUD/FC2/SuSE/Debian/Mozilla/Galeon/FF/Mozilla or Epiphany. In those 7 months, I haven't been able to see the problem first hand. Of course, I can't deny that it's happening, I just can't make it happen, or even stumble across it. I'm even wondering if it's a network/proxy thing.


Then again, that JStarkey fellow... now he's a complete slacker ;)

Coming from someone who was in Myrtle Beach while I was slaving in the dungeon? ;)

[jstarkey]

Originally posted by trex005
I guess they are having trouble reproducing the bug, (though it does seem that it is very reproducable) and when I can't reproduce a bug in my job... there is nothing I can do. period...


Exactly! Since day 1, I or any of us have yet to have it happen to us. I can only do so much with a screenshot. I really do feel bad that it's happening, but it's really tough to even theorize on how the only file on the whole server with a closing body and html tag ends up at the top of the page. Even tougher, since those two tags are NOT the only code in that file.


anywho in summary... I REALLY feel the frustration... but I REALLY sympathize too!

I'll check again with our admins to see if they can think of anything, or if there's any good news in sight. Byron hooked us up with PHP 5 on one site two weeks ago. Maybe I can get him to try it over here. This thread may be initiative. The big issue has been the ad software preventing us from upgrading, but he hacked the PHP5 source to get it working on the other machine, I don't know if the same thing will work on this server. I'll post an update after I speak to him in the morning.

[planetsim]

If its to any help i dont see the code anymore i just get asked to download the HTML page with Firefox now since i upgraded to 1.0PR aka 0.10

[piersk]

John, are you on the same LAN as the webserver running the site? Also, are there any other sites (such as Flashkit etc etc) on the same server?

[Weedpacket]

I'm baffled also: some pages are served missing the closing </body></html> tags they should have (though since the HTML spec says they're optional, no-one notices) - and presumably when they go AWOL it's because they've been served up on someone else's page, before the headers, and so it all goes blechh for them. I hope both parts of the incident happen to the same person, so that at least the problem is restricted to a single (reused) HTTP 1.1 connection, because if it's leaking across connections then something smells very rotten.

I've tried using livehttpheaders to to see what if anything it can tell, but it's still meteor-spotting. (Incidentally, your server is reporting an HTTP-Version of "1.x" in its responses - why not 1.1?)

[laserlight]

some pages are served missing the closing </body></html> tags they should have (though since the HTML spec says they're optional, no-one notices)
Are you sure they are optional?
I had the impression that they are optional in the sense that the start tag is optional... but if you have the start tag then you must have the end tag.

Though the spec also says that the <head> element is optional, yet goes on to say that <title> is required and must be within <head/>, which sort of makes <head/> required, doesnt it?
Oh well.

[jstarkey]

Has this happened off the boards? In other areas of the site? To anyone?

[bubblenut]

Not for me, but then I don't use the site nearly as much as I use the board.

[piersk]

Originally posted by bubblenut
Not for me, but then I don't use the site nearly as much as I use the board.

See, I reckon its the adverts. Since it's pretty random which one comes up (I'm assuming), that would explain why the page is only wierd sometimes and not others, and why it's not possible to re-create the problem.

[jstarkey]

Originally posted by piersk
See, I reckon its the adverts. Since it's pretty random which one comes up (I'm assuming), that would explain why the page is only wierd sometimes and not others, and why it's not possible to re-create the problem.

Right now, I have a script requesting pages every few seconds. It's comparing the headers and looking for any html showing up before them. So far, it's checked > 2000 pages and no issues. I'm going to leave it running for the next 24 hours.

[Elizabeth]

Originally posted by jstarkey
Coming from someone who was in Myrtle Beach while I was slaving in the dungeon? ;) Hey, I offered free room & board if you wanted to be our personal nanny :D

[jstarkey]

Originally posted by piersk
John, are you on the same LAN as the webserver running the site? Also, are there any other sites (such as Flashkit etc etc) on the same server?

Hey, sorry. I missed your post above.

Nope, not on the same LAN. And PHP Builder is the only site on the server. There used to be another, but that was years ago.

[jstarkey]

Originally posted by Elizabeth
Hey, I offered free room & board if you wanted to be our personal nanny :D

I had no problem with that until you said I couldn't take the little one with the bars to me.

You're sheltering that young'n. You know that?! ;)

[Elizabeth]

Originally posted by jstarkey
I had no problem with that until you said I couldn't take the little one with the bars to me. But my little one doesn't have any bars.

(... and you wonder why I keep him away from you. :rolleyes: )

[jstarkey]

Originally posted by Elizabeth
But my little one doesn't have any bars.


Whoa, sorry I must be lysdexic :(

You know what I meant. Sheeesh. lol

[Weedpacket]

Originally posted by laserlight
Are you sure they are optional?
I had the impression that they are optional in the sense that the start tag is optional... but if you have the start tag then you must have the end tag. I was going to reply to this in my own words, but managed to dig myself a hole. The relevant part of the spec is §3.2.1 (http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/intro/sgmltut.html#h-3.2.1); some elements allow the end tag to be absent, some allow the start tag to be absent, and the complete list of which is which is built into the DTD (the two characters following the entity's name relevant <!ENTITY declaration) - body and html closing tags are both optional: an html element requires a head element, and a head element requires a title element; a title element needs both start and end tags, while a head tag can get away with not having either.
<html><title></title><body>foo</body></html>
is valid. Generally speaking, tags are optional if it is possible (roughly speaking) to guess where the tags would go if they were present. </p> tags are optional, and if not supplied presumably go immediately before the next block-level element; the <head> tag is not needed because if it had been there it would have to have been immediately after the <html> tag; <body> isn't needed, since if it were present it would have to folow the header elements ... and </body></html> is optional, because every HTML page can be expected to end with that! (Roll on XHTML)

Oh, wait. I did....

[vaaaska]

Is this what people are talking about? I see it about 20% of the time...

Well, about the place being 'broken' not the other stuff...v

[jstarkey]

Just a quick update. I think I've found the problem. It appears it may be a feed from another server. I'm tracking down the people and testing the feed now. Probably won't hear anything back until tomorrow.

[jstarkey]

Ok, I've mad a change that I think will take care of it.

If it happens again, can you post here to let me know?

[piersk]

Originally posted by jstarkey
Ok, I've mad a change that I think will take care of it.

If it happens again, can you post here to let me know?

Hmmm... not screwed up yet...

/me does test of opening lots of windows in lots of tabs...

By jove I think he's done it!!!! :D :D :D

[bubblenut]

/me pats jstarkey on the back and hands him a beer

I've been on and off all morning and haven't had it happen a single time. I guess it's time for you to kick back, crack open your beer and bask in your glory :D

By the by; are you going to give a little breakdown of what the problem was in the end?

[stolzyboy]

now, if you view source, you get


</body></html>
</body>
</html>

[trex005]

As this thread starter, I'm glad to report that this issue seems to be resolved. Thank you "Big Brother"!! I will now mark this thread resolved!

[jstarkey]

Originally posted by bubblenut

I've been on and off all morning and haven't had it happen a single time. I guess it's time for you to kick back, crack open your beer and bask in your glory :D


Figures, just when I quit drinking...


By the by; are you going to give a little breakdown of what the problem was in the end?

Yep. I was working on some tests to speed up the serving of pages a year or so ago and added the closing tags to the append file. (I use several php.ini files on the server, so this only affected WWW pages).

Then, we added a new RSS feed to the server and I was sent a canned script to pull the data, which I installed and was using.

Then, someone from the dev dept wrapped that script in a perl script to call it to help take the load off their servers. The way they wrapped it caused the append file to be loaded into the page at the end of their wrapper. So, at the end of that include was an html and body closing tag.

The thing that boggles me is, why was it intermittent?

:(