Great catch, thanks Norm. That too is part of the r1753592 backport proposal, hoping someone is willing to look at these proposals.
On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 6:31 PM, NormW <no...@gknw.net> wrote: > G/M > Did a test build of the 2.2.x tree and all builds nicely with exception of > the following; if release is 'in progress' I leave to others to decide what > to do about it. > >> D:\Projects\svn\httpd-2.2.x>svn diff >> Index: modules/proxy/mod_proxy.c >> =================================================================== >> --- modules/proxy/mod_proxy.c (revision 1777591) >> +++ modules/proxy/mod_proxy.c (working copy) >> @@ -1088,9 +1088,9 @@ >> * backend itself but by the proxy e.g. a bad gateway) in order >> to give >> * ap_proxy_post_request a chance to act correctly on the status >> code. >> */ >> + int post_status = proxy_run_post_request(worker, balancer, r, >> conf); >> saved_status = r->status; >> r->status = access_status; >> - int post_status = proxy_run_post_request(worker, balancer, r, >> conf); >> /* >> * Only restore r->status if it has not been changed by >> * ap_proxy_post_request as we assume that this change was >> intentional. > > > Norm
