Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-10 Thread Jim Jagielski


On Dec 9, 2008, at 8:36 PM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:





-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Jim Jagielski
Gesendet: Dienstag, 9. Dezember 2008 21:54
An: dev@httpd.apache.org
Betreff: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha




Hmmm, normally ap_remove_output_filter should be able to handle this
case. I guess this needs some investigation why it does not.


Yeah... for me, that's the worrisome part. Will do some deeping
tracing on the code path.


I think I know what happens. The problem is that we have not updated  
the
request_rec field in all filter structs at this point of time. So  
ap_remove_output_filter
updates rr-output_filters instead of r-output_filters. The  
following patch
reverts r724805 and fixes the issue by moving the calls to  
update_r_in_filters
up in the code. I couldn't find any framework failures afterwards.  
Do you still

see some?




:)

Yep. Some tracing indicated that and I did some alternate
adjusting to work around it. But this one is cleaner.
Added in r725077

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-09 Thread Ruediger Pluem


On 12/09/2008 01:16 AM, Paul Querna wrote:
 Paul Querna wrote:
 Paul Querna wrote:
 The problem with velocity's site is an interaction between mod_deflate,
 mod_include, subrequests and directory indexes.  In production, we are
 still running 2.3.0-alpha, but I have disabled mod_deflate, which seems
 to work as a work around for now.

 We are now running with mod_deflate enabled again, with this revision
 patched into our version:
 http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrevision=724515

 Thanks to rpluem for figuring this out.
 
 We have reverted to 2.2.x on www for now.
 
 The change fixed velocity.apache.org, but broke www.apache.org.

Can you please provide some details how it broke www.apache.org?

Regards

Rüdiger



Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-09 Thread Jim Jagielski


On Dec 8, 2008, at 7:43 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:


Paul Querna wrote:


The change fixed velocity.apache.org, but broke www.apache.org.

All of this sub-request + output filter stuff started in r620133  
kinda

needs some more thought.


My thought is that fast_internal_subrequest (which I last  
refactored, but

was bogusly introduced for mod_negotiation) must die, now.

Votes?



Can we simply revert r620133 (et.al.) and then start from *that*
point? That is, get to a known OK state and then boot  
fast_internal_subrequest?


Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-09 Thread Ruediger Pluem


On 12/09/2008 02:06 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
 
 On Dec 8, 2008, at 7:43 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
 
 Paul Querna wrote:

 The change fixed velocity.apache.org, but broke www.apache.org.

 All of this sub-request + output filter stuff started in r620133 kinda
 needs some more thought.

 My thought is that fast_internal_subrequest (which I last refactored, but
 was bogusly introduced for mod_negotiation) must die, now.

 Votes?

 
 Can we simply revert r620133 (et.al.) and then start from *that*
 point? That is, get to a known OK state and then boot
 fast_internal_subrequest?

Currently I would be more keen to know the issues we are still facing, so
that we can keep these cases and issues in mind when we do a rewrite of
this stuff.

Regards

Rüdiger



Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-09 Thread Paul Querna

Ruediger Pluem wrote:


On 12/09/2008 02:06 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:

On Dec 8, 2008, at 7:43 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:


Paul Querna wrote:

The change fixed velocity.apache.org, but broke www.apache.org.

All of this sub-request + output filter stuff started in r620133 kinda
needs some more thought.

My thought is that fast_internal_subrequest (which I last refactored, but
was bogusly introduced for mod_negotiation) must die, now.

Votes?


Can we simply revert r620133 (et.al.) and then start from *that*
point? That is, get to a known OK state and then boot
fast_internal_subrequest?


Currently I would be more keen to know the issues we are still facing, so
that we can keep these cases and issues in mind when we do a rewrite of
this stuff.


Applying the patch invsersed the working directoy indexes.

velocity worked, but www.apache.org stopped working.   Deflate was 
loaded in both cases.


www.a.o didn't have SSI, or any othe rfilters to my knowledge, soI'd 
guess the patch broke it in anothe subtle way...


-Paul


Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-09 Thread Jim Jagielski


On Dec 9, 2008, at 12:15 PM, Paul Querna wrote:


Ruediger Pluem wrote:

On 12/09/2008 02:06 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:

On Dec 8, 2008, at 7:43 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:


Paul Querna wrote:

The change fixed velocity.apache.org, but broke www.apache.org.

All of this sub-request + output filter stuff started in r620133  
kinda

needs some more thought.
My thought is that fast_internal_subrequest (which I last  
refactored, but

was bogusly introduced for mod_negotiation) must die, now.

Votes?


Can we simply revert r620133 (et.al.) and then start from *that*
point? That is, get to a known OK state and then boot
fast_internal_subrequest?
Currently I would be more keen to know the issues we are still  
facing, so
that we can keep these cases and issues in mind when we do a  
rewrite of

this stuff.


Applying the patch invsersed the working directoy indexes.

velocity worked, but www.apache.org stopped working.   Deflate was  
loaded in both cases.




hmmm

r724805 cleans up a lot of framework breaks from r724515

looking to be a positional issue...


Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-09 Thread Ruediger Pluem


On 12/09/2008 07:23 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
 
 On Dec 9, 2008, at 12:15 PM, Paul Querna wrote:
 
 Ruediger Pluem wrote:
 On 12/09/2008 02:06 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
 On Dec 8, 2008, at 7:43 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:

 Paul Querna wrote:
 The change fixed velocity.apache.org, but broke www.apache.org.

 All of this sub-request + output filter stuff started in r620133
 kinda
 needs some more thought.
 My thought is that fast_internal_subrequest (which I last
 refactored, but
 was bogusly introduced for mod_negotiation) must die, now.

 Votes?

 Can we simply revert r620133 (et.al.) and then start from *that*
 point? That is, get to a known OK state and then boot
 fast_internal_subrequest?
 Currently I would be more keen to know the issues we are still
 facing, so
 that we can keep these cases and issues in mind when we do a rewrite of
 this stuff.

 Applying the patch invsersed the working directoy indexes.

 velocity worked, but www.apache.org stopped working.   Deflate was
 loaded in both cases.

 
 hmmm
 
 r724805 cleans up a lot of framework breaks from r724515
 
 looking to be a positional issue...

Hmmm, normally ap_remove_output_filter should be able to handle this
case. I guess this needs some investigation why it does not. But for the
time being this looks like a good fix.
Thanks for doing and sorry that I didn't run the framework before committing
r724515 :-(.

Regards

Rüdiger




Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-09 Thread Jim Jagielski


On Dec 9, 2008, at 2:39 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:




On 12/09/2008 07:23 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:


On Dec 9, 2008, at 12:15 PM, Paul Querna wrote:


Ruediger Pluem wrote:

On 12/09/2008 02:06 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:

On Dec 8, 2008, at 7:43 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:


Paul Querna wrote:

The change fixed velocity.apache.org, but broke www.apache.org.

All of this sub-request + output filter stuff started in r620133
kinda
needs some more thought.

My thought is that fast_internal_subrequest (which I last
refactored, but
was bogusly introduced for mod_negotiation) must die, now.

Votes?


Can we simply revert r620133 (et.al.) and then start from *that*
point? That is, get to a known OK state and then boot
fast_internal_subrequest?

Currently I would be more keen to know the issues we are still
facing, so
that we can keep these cases and issues in mind when we do a  
rewrite of

this stuff.


Applying the patch invsersed the working directoy indexes.

velocity worked, but www.apache.org stopped working.   Deflate was
loaded in both cases.



hmmm

r724805 cleans up a lot of framework breaks from r724515

looking to be a positional issue...


Hmmm, normally ap_remove_output_filter should be able to handle this
case. I guess this needs some investigation why it does not.


Yeah... for me, that's the worrisome part. Will do some deeping
tracing on the code path.


But for the
time being this looks like a good fix.
Thanks for doing and sorry that I didn't run the framework before  
committing

r724515 :-(.

Regards

Rüdiger






Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-09 Thread Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group
 

 -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
 Von: Jim Jagielski 
 Gesendet: Dienstag, 9. Dezember 2008 21:54
 An: dev@httpd.apache.org
 Betreff: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha
 
 
 On Dec 9, 2008, at 2:39 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
 
 
 
  On 12/09/2008 07:23 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
 
  On Dec 9, 2008, at 12:15 PM, Paul Querna wrote:
 
  Ruediger Pluem wrote:
  On 12/09/2008 02:06 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
  On Dec 8, 2008, at 7:43 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
 
  Paul Querna wrote:
  The change fixed velocity.apache.org, but broke 
 www.apache.org.
 
  All of this sub-request + output filter stuff started 
 in r620133
  kinda
  needs some more thought.
  My thought is that fast_internal_subrequest (which I last
  refactored, but
  was bogusly introduced for mod_negotiation) must die, now.
 
  Votes?
 
  Can we simply revert r620133 (et.al.) and then start from *that*
  point? That is, get to a known OK state and then boot
  fast_internal_subrequest?
  Currently I would be more keen to know the issues we are still
  facing, so
  that we can keep these cases and issues in mind when we do a  
  rewrite of
  this stuff.
 
  Applying the patch invsersed the working directoy indexes.
 
  velocity worked, but www.apache.org stopped working.   Deflate was
  loaded in both cases.
 
 
  hmmm
 
  r724805 cleans up a lot of framework breaks from r724515
 
  looking to be a positional issue...
 
  Hmmm, normally ap_remove_output_filter should be able to handle this
  case. I guess this needs some investigation why it does not.
 
 Yeah... for me, that's the worrisome part. Will do some deeping
 tracing on the code path.

I think I know what happens. The problem is that we have not updated the
request_rec field in all filter structs at this point of time. So 
ap_remove_output_filter
updates rr-output_filters instead of r-output_filters. The following patch
reverts r724805 and fixes the issue by moving the calls to update_r_in_filters
up in the code. I couldn't find any framework failures afterwards. Do you still
see some?

Index: modules/http/http_request.c
===
--- modules/http/http_request.c (revision 724941)
+++ modules/http/http_request.c (working copy)
@@ -518,6 +518,15 @@
 r-output_filters = rr-output_filters;
 r-input_filters = rr-input_filters;

+/* If any filters pointed at the now-defunct rr, we must point them
+ * at our new instance of r.  In particular, some of rr's structures
+ * will now be bogus (say rr-headers_out).  If a filter tried to modify
+ * their f-r structure when it is pointing to rr, the real request_rec
+ * will not get updated.  Fix that here.
+ */
+update_r_in_filters(r-input_filters, rr, r);
+update_r_in_filters(r-output_filters, rr, r);
+
 if (r-main) {
 ap_add_output_filter_handle(ap_subreq_core_filter_handle,
 NULL, r, r-connection);
@@ -541,20 +550,8 @@
 }
 if (next  (next-frec == ap_subreq_core_filter_handle)) {
 ap_remove_output_filter(next);
-if (next == r-output_filters) {
-r-output_filters = r-output_filters-next;
-}
 }
 }
-
-/* If any filters pointed at the now-defunct rr, we must point them
- * at our new instance of r.  In particular, some of rr's structures
- * will now be bogus (say rr-headers_out).  If a filter tried to modify
- * their f-r structure when it is pointing to rr, the real request_rec
- * will not get updated.  Fix that here.
- */
-update_r_in_filters(r-input_filters, rr, r);
-update_r_in_filters(r-output_filters, rr, r);
 }

 AP_DECLARE(void) ap_internal_redirect(const char *new_uri, request_rec *r)


Regards

Rüdiger


Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-09 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
Henning Schmiedehausen wrote:
 [... to the thread as a whole, not specifically to Jim's mail ...]
 
 Let's just say, I usually run alpha-level code in a sandbox for a while
 to find problems, We could use it e.g. on people.a.o or maybe httpd.a.o
 if you are so keen on it. :-)

Sorry this seems to be a communications problem.

Trunk on httpd is approximately as robust as the last stable release.
But it is not stable.

httpd alpha's (n.odd revs) represent an API in flux; users and developers
are warned that the API can and likely will change before the next stable
release.  The alpha period provides a window during which 3rd party module
developers can propose patches or ask for API enhancements or changes by
actually running code which is headed for general release.

The beta's (n.even.0 ...) are the first chance for module authors to
stabilize their add ins and for users to point out to us very very odd
edge cases due to their unique [cough, cough] configurations.

The GA stable releases (n.even.x) represent a pretty much unbroken chain
of bug fixes, and energies turn to the trunk again to develop new ideas.

So there was little risk w.r.t. deploying 2.3.0 alpha on our infra; it
only means that the folks deploying it had to adjust for new configuration
syntax, API changes and watch things closely.  They did this, and have
therefore found a fix to a problem which would have later plagued infra.

If the httpd developers weren't an active part of the infra team, I might
share your concerns.  If I didn't understand the health and state of the
code, I'd likely share your concerns.  But as I point out above, you have
little cause for concern with httpd deployments.


Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-09 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
Paul Querna wrote:
 Gregg L. Smith wrote:
 Paul Querna wrote:
 Test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.3.0-alpha are available at:

 http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/

 Your votes please;

  ±1
  [  ]  Release httpd-2.3.0 as Alpha


 Vote closes at 7:00 UTC on Tuesday December 9 2008.

 Thanks,

 Paul
 -? tested on Windows XP built both VS9 and VS6

 Am I missing something?

 [Mon Dec 08 13:21:17 2008] [crit] Server MUST relinquish startup
 privileges before accepting connections.  Please ensure mod_unixd or
 other system security module is loaded.
 Configuration Failed
 
 I'm guessing no one updated the winnt mpm for the changes to unixd.
 
 So the proposed release is busted on windows too :-)

Given the state of things - I'm not -1 on a unix-specific alpha release
for this issue, but am leaning -.5 for the deflate/filtering/subrequest
problems that were recently uncovered.

I'll research this issue so when we are ready to try 2.3.1-alpha, it's
been resolved.  Might not be in the next 2 days though, think it will
likely have to wait for my weekend.


Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-08 Thread Justin Erenkrantz
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 12:20 PM, Sander Temme [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 On Dec 7, 2008, at 6:33 PM, Henning Schmiedehausen wrote:

 Our production sites IMHO shouldn't be guinea pigs for -alpha versions.

 Best. Place. Ever. to try out our stuff to find and fix bugs.

 Especially nasty edge cases like this one.

 www.apache.org should run dogfood whenever possible.  How else can we
 justify asking the general public to try our stuff out?

++1.  -- justin


Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-08 Thread Graham Leggett

Henning Schmiedehausen wrote:


If that is the reason that e.g. the Velocity site broke, I am +1 for
rolling this back to a known stable 2.2.x version.

Our production sites IMHO shouldn't be guinea pigs for -alpha versions.


If we don't trust our own software to run in production, who else will?

Regards,
Graham
--


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature


Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-08 Thread Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group
 

 -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
 Von: Paul Querna 
 Gesendet: Sonntag, 7. Dezember 2008 08:18
 An: dev@httpd.apache.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Betreff: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha
 
 Test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.3.0-alpha are available at:
 
  http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
 
 Your votes please;
 
   ±1
   [  ]  Release httpd-2.3.0 as Alpha
 
 
 Vote closes at 7:00 UTC on Tuesday December 9 2008.

Where do we track issues that do not prevent an alpha release
but need to be resolved before 2.4.0?

In the STATUS file of trunk?

Regards

Rüdiger


Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-08 Thread Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group
 

 -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
 Von: Jim Jagielski 
 Gesendet: Montag, 8. Dezember 2008 14:38
 An: dev@httpd.apache.org
 Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Betreff: Re: AW: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha
 
 
 On Dec 8, 2008, at 8:15 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
 
 
 
  -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
  Von: Paul Querna
  Gesendet: Sonntag, 7. Dezember 2008 08:18
  An: dev@httpd.apache.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Betreff: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha
 
  Test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.3.0-alpha are available at:
 
  http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
 
  Your votes please;
 
   ±1
   [  ]  Release httpd-2.3.0 as Alpha
 
 
 
  I noticed one problem. Since we placed the proxy balancer 
 modules in a
  separate folder they get loaded *before* mod_proxy in the created
  httpd.conf. This causes httpd to fail at start as the 
 balancer modules
  need symbols from proxy_util (which is linked into mod_proxy).
 
 
 
 D'oh! Of course. We can simply define the load ordering
 in register_hooks()

How so? The loading of the module already fails in the dynamic linking
phase.

Regards

Rüdiger


Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-08 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
Graham Leggett wrote:
 Henning Schmiedehausen wrote:
 
 If that is the reason that e.g. the Velocity site broke, I am +1 for
 rolling this back to a known stable 2.2.x version.

 Our production sites IMHO shouldn't be guinea pigs for -alpha versions.
 
 If we don't trust our own software to run in production, who else will?

More to the point, it was already rolled back by disabling mod_deflate
as soon as the issue was identified.

Henning, if we take you literally, then we might as well pass infra
the charter that they are not to develop code for deployment, because
everything from your fingers to the keyboard is alpha until proven and
juried by peers.

This has been standard practice for 10 years; what's changed?


Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-08 Thread Jim Jagielski


On Dec 8, 2008, at 11:40 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:


Graham Leggett wrote:

Henning Schmiedehausen wrote:


If that is the reason that e.g. the Velocity site broke, I am +1 for
rolling this back to a known stable 2.2.x version.

Our production sites IMHO shouldn't be guinea pigs for -alpha  
versions.


If we don't trust our own software to run in production, who else  
will?


More to the point, it was already rolled back by disabling  
mod_deflate

as soon as the issue was identified.

Henning, if we take you literally, then we might as well pass infra
the charter that they are not to develop code for deployment, because
everything from your fingers to the keyboard is alpha until proven and
juried by peers.

This has been standard practice for 10 years; what's changed?



It would have been nice to test 2.2.11 first, if even for a week,
before 2.3.0, IMO

After all, we do expect people to use 2.2.11 before they use 2.3.0 :) :)


Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-08 Thread Paul Querna

Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:

-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Paul Querna 
Gesendet: Sonntag, 7. Dezember 2008 08:18

An: dev@httpd.apache.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Betreff: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

Test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.3.0-alpha are available at:

 http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/

Your votes please;

  ±1
  [  ]  Release httpd-2.3.0 as Alpha


Vote closes at 7:00 UTC on Tuesday December 9 2008.


Where do we track issues that do not prevent an alpha release
but need to be resolved before 2.4.0?

In the STATUS file of trunk?


Yes, STATUS file on trunk should be the right place.



Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-08 Thread Paul Querna

Paul Querna wrote:

Test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.3.0-alpha are available at:

http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/

Your votes please;

 ±1
 [  ]  Release httpd-2.3.0 as Alpha


Vote closes at 7:00 UTC on Tuesday December 9 2008.


-1 for these two reasons:

1) Default build doesn't work with mod_proxy due to module load order 
issues.  I believe even for an alpha, we should at least compile and 
start with the default configuration.


2) The sub-requests issues seen on velocity.apache.org, while I'm not so 
sure about this one being a blocker, it does prevent our own 
infrastructure from fully using 2.3.x without workarounds.


Thanks,

Paul




Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-08 Thread Gregg L. Smith

Paul Querna wrote:

Test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.3.0-alpha are available at:

http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/

Your votes please;

 ±1
 [  ]  Release httpd-2.3.0 as Alpha


Vote closes at 7:00 UTC on Tuesday December 9 2008.

Thanks,

Paul

-? tested on Windows XP built both VS9 and VS6

Am I missing something?

[Mon Dec 08 13:21:17 2008] [crit] Server MUST relinquish startup 
privileges before accepting connections.  Please ensure mod_unixd or 
other system security module is loaded.

Configuration Failed


Gregg



Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-08 Thread Paul Querna

Gregg L. Smith wrote:

Paul Querna wrote:

Test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.3.0-alpha are available at:

http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/

Your votes please;

 ±1
 [  ]  Release httpd-2.3.0 as Alpha


Vote closes at 7:00 UTC on Tuesday December 9 2008.

Thanks,

Paul

-? tested on Windows XP built both VS9 and VS6

Am I missing something?

[Mon Dec 08 13:21:17 2008] [crit] Server MUST relinquish startup 
privileges before accepting connections.  Please ensure mod_unixd or 
other system security module is loaded.

Configuration Failed


I'm guessing no one updated the winnt mpm for the changes to unixd.

So the proposed release is busted on windows too :-)

-Paul


Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-08 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
Paul Querna wrote:
 Gregg L. Smith wrote:

 [Mon Dec 08 13:21:17 2008] [crit] Server MUST relinquish startup
 privileges before accepting connections.  Please ensure mod_unixd or
 other system security module is loaded.
 Configuration Failed
 
 I'm guessing no one updated the winnt mpm for the changes to unixd.
 
 So the proposed release is busted on windows too :-)

Well, windows can't relinquish the context it is run-as (trivially)
without such things as user account passwords and so forth.  So, one
could say the unixd API is busted ;-)

But I wouldn't mind at all if windows emitted a notice that This server
is running as a privilaged LocalSystem user, preventing access to any
network file systems (UNC Shares) - you are strongly encouraged to
reconfigure the xxx service to run-as a more restricted user

and if running in another privileged context; This server is running as
the a privilaged xxx user, you are strongly encouraged to reconfigure
the xxx service to run-as a more restricted user

What happens on unix if started as the same user?



Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-08 Thread Gregg L. Smith




While we are at it;
If mod_mem_cache is no longer going to be used, needs to be removed
from makefile.win

Gregg

Paul Querna wrote:
Gregg
L. Smith wrote:
  
  Paul Querna wrote:

Test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.3.0-alpha
are available at:
  
  
 http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
  
  
Your votes please;
  
  
1
  
[ ] Release httpd-2.3.0 as Alpha
  
  
  
Vote closes at 7:00 UTC on Tuesday December 9 2008.
  
  
Thanks,
  
  
Paul
  

-? tested on Windows XP built both VS9 and VS6


Am I missing something?


[Mon Dec 08 13:21:17 2008] [crit] Server MUST relinquish startup
privileges before accepting connections. Please ensure mod_unixd or
other system security module is loaded.

Configuration Failed

  
  
I'm guessing no one updated the winnt mpm for the changes to unixd.
  
  
So the proposed release is busted on windows too :-)
  
  
-Paul
  


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com 
Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.9.15/1837 - Release Date: 12/8/2008 9:38 AM

  



--- makefile.win(PR 720062)
+++ makefile.win(Working Copy)
@@ -302,7 +302,6 @@
cd modules\cache
 $(MAKE) $(MAKEOPT) -f mod_cache.mak   CFG=mod_cache - Win32 
$(LONG) RECURSE=0 $(CTARGET)
 $(MAKE) $(MAKEOPT) -f mod_file_cache.mak  CFG=mod_file_cache - Win32 
$(LONG) RECURSE=0 $(CTARGET)
-$(MAKE) $(MAKEOPT) -f mod_mem_cache.mak   CFG=mod_mem_cache - Win32 
$(LONG) RECURSE=0 $(CTARGET)
 $(MAKE) $(MAKEOPT) -f mod_disk_cache.mak  CFG=mod_disk_cache - Win32 
$(LONG) RECURSE=0 $(CTARGET)
 $(MAKE) $(MAKEOPT) -f mod_socache_dbm.mak CFG=mod_socache_dbm - Win32 
$(LONG) RECURSE=0 $(CTARGET)
 !IFDEF ALL
@@ -525,7 +524,6 @@
copy modules\arch\win32\$(LONG)\mod_isapi.$(src_so) $(inst_so) .y
copy modules\cache\$(LONG)\mod_cache.$(src_so)  $(inst_so) .y
copy modules\cache\$(LONG)\mod_file_cache.$(src_so) $(inst_so) .y
-   copy modules\cache\$(LONG)\mod_mem_cache.$(src_so)  $(inst_so) .y
copy modules\cache\$(LONG)\mod_disk_cache.$(src_so) $(inst_so) .y
copy modules\cache\$(LONG)\mod_socache_dbm.$(src_so)$(inst_so) .y
-copy modules\cache\$(LONG)\mod_socache_dc.$(src_so)$(inst_so) .y


Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-08 Thread Paul Querna
Paul Querna wrote:
 The problem with velocity's site is an interaction between mod_deflate,
 mod_include, subrequests and directory indexes.  In production, we are
 still running 2.3.0-alpha, but I have disabled mod_deflate, which seems
 to work as a work around for now.

We are now running with mod_deflate enabled again, with this revision
patched into our version:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrevision=724515

Thanks to rpluem for figuring this out.



Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-08 Thread Paul Querna

Paul Querna wrote:

Paul Querna wrote:

The problem with velocity's site is an interaction between mod_deflate,
mod_include, subrequests and directory indexes.  In production, we are
still running 2.3.0-alpha, but I have disabled mod_deflate, which seems
to work as a work around for now.


We are now running with mod_deflate enabled again, with this revision
patched into our version:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrevision=724515

Thanks to rpluem for figuring this out.


We have reverted to 2.2.x on www for now.

The change fixed velocity.apache.org, but broke www.apache.org.

All of this sub-request + output filter stuff started in r620133 kinda 
needs some more thought.


-Paul



Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-08 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
Paul Querna wrote:
 
 The change fixed velocity.apache.org, but broke www.apache.org.
 
 All of this sub-request + output filter stuff started in r620133 kinda
 needs some more thought.

My thought is that fast_internal_subrequest (which I last refactored, but
was bogusly introduced for mod_negotiation) must die, now.

Votes?

+1 here to kill fast_internal_subrequest and provide the one fastest
mechanism that we can safely craft.

Bill


Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-08 Thread Graham Dumpleton
2008/12/9 William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Paul Querna wrote:

 The change fixed velocity.apache.org, but broke www.apache.org.

 All of this sub-request + output filter stuff started in r620133 kinda
 needs some more thought.

 My thought is that fast_internal_subrequest (which I last refactored, but
 was bogusly introduced for mod_negotiation) must die, now.

 Votes?

 +1 here to kill fast_internal_subrequest and provide the one fastest
 mechanism that we can safely craft.

Are you referring to ap_internal_fast_redirect()?

Still also used by mod_dir, with its use in the latter in the past
causing odd issues with duplication of information in tables. For
where this showed up in mod_python see:

  http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON-146

Was that duplication of information ever addressed?

Graham


Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-08 Thread André Malo
* William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: 


 Paul Querna wrote:
  The change fixed velocity.apache.org, but broke www.apache.org.
 
  All of this sub-request + output filter stuff started in r620133 kinda
  needs some more thought.

 My thought is that fast_internal_subrequest (which I last refactored, but
 was bogusly introduced for mod_negotiation) must die, now.

 Votes?

 +1 here to kill fast_internal_subrequest and provide the one fastest
 mechanism that we can safely craft.

+1. wholeheartedly ;-)

nd


Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-08 Thread Nick Kew

Gregg L. Smith wrote:


Am I missing something?

[Mon Dec 08 13:21:17 2008] [crit] Server MUST relinquish startup 
privileges before accepting connections.  Please ensure mod_unixd or 
other system security module is loaded.

Configuration Failed


Probably not.  Looks like this'll be broken on all non-unix-family
platforms, for the same reason.

Does the following patch fix it for you?

--- modules/arch/win32/mod_win32.c  (revision 724570)
+++ modules/arch/win32/mod_win32.c  (working copy)
@@ -544,6 +544,7 @@
 static int win32_pre_config(apr_pool_t *pconf_, apr_pool_t *plog, 
apr_pool_t *ptemp)

 {
 win_nt = (osver.dwPlatformId != VER_PLATFORM_WIN32_WINDOWS);
+ap_sys_privileges_handlers(1);
 return OK;
 }

--
Nick Kew


Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-08 Thread Gregg L. Smith

Nick,

It works! ... but needs to have mpm_common.h included
I notice it takes about 4 seconds to serve the It works page on this
P4 3.0G HT, 2.5G DDR2 XP  VC6

Gregg

--- modules/arch/win32/mod_win32.c(revision 724570)
+++ modules/arch/win32/mod_win32.c(working copy)
@@ -31,6 +31,7 @@
#include mod_cgi.h
#include apr_lib.h
#include ap_regkey.h
+#include mpm_common.h

extern OSVERSIONINFO osver; /* hiding in mpm_winnt.c */
static int win_nt;
@@ -544,6 +545,7 @@
static int win32_pre_config(apr_pool_t *pconf_, apr_pool_t *plog, 
apr_pool_t *ptemp)

{
win_nt = (osver.dwPlatformId != VER_PLATFORM_WIN32_WINDOWS);
+ap_sys_privileges_handlers(1);
return OK;
}



Nick Kew wrote:

Gregg L. Smith wrote:


Am I missing something?

[Mon Dec 08 13:21:17 2008] [crit] Server MUST relinquish startup 
privileges before accepting connections.  Please ensure mod_unixd or 
other system security module is loaded.

Configuration Failed


Probably not.  Looks like this'll be broken on all non-unix-family
platforms, for the same reason.

Does the following patch fix it for you?

--- modules/arch/win32/mod_win32.c(revision 724570)
+++ modules/arch/win32/mod_win32.c(working copy)
@@ -544,6 +544,7 @@
 static int win32_pre_config(apr_pool_t *pconf_, apr_pool_t *plog, 
apr_pool_t *ptemp)

 {
 win_nt = (osver.dwPlatformId != VER_PLATFORM_WIN32_WINDOWS);
+ap_sys_privileges_handlers(1);
 return OK;
 }





Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-07 Thread Paul Querna
{eos,aruroa}.apache.org, aka www.apache.org have both been upgraded to 
2.3.0.


If anyone sees anything odd, please let me know.

Thanks,

Paul

Paul Querna wrote:

Test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.3.0-alpha are available at:

http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/

Your votes please;

 ±1
 [  ]  Release httpd-2.3.0 as Alpha


Vote closes at 7:00 UTC on Tuesday December 9 2008.

Thanks,

Paul




Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-07 Thread Sander Temme


On Dec 7, 2008, at 6:33 PM, Henning Schmiedehausen wrote:

Our production sites IMHO shouldn't be guinea pigs for -alpha  
versions.



Best. Place. Ever. to try out our stuff to find and fix bugs.

Especially nasty edge cases like this one.

www.apache.org should run dogfood whenever possible.  How else can we  
justify asking the general public to try our stuff out?


S.

--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://www.temme.net/sander/
PGP FP: 51B4 8727 466A 0BC3 69F4  B7B8 B2BE BC40 1529 24AF



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature


Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-07 Thread Paul Querna
Henning Schmiedehausen wrote:
 If that is the reason that e.g. the Velocity site broke, I am +1 for
 rolling this back to a known stable 2.2.x version.
 
 Our production sites IMHO shouldn't be guinea pigs for -alpha versions.

We have always run -alpha versions, even with experimental MPMs on our
production web servers.

Eating our own dog food is very good, if we have developers around to
fix it.

The problem with velocity's site is an interaction between mod_deflate,
mod_include, subrequests and directory indexes.  In production, we are
still running 2.3.0-alpha, but I have disabled mod_deflate, which seems
to work as a work around for now.

Hopefully in the next day we will have a patch to fix it.

Thanks,

Paul




Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-06 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
Paul Querna wrote:
 
 Your votes please;
 
  ±1
  [  ]  Release httpd-2.3.0 as Alpha
 
 
 Vote closes at 7:00 UTC on Tuesday December 9 2008.

 72 hours for a first alpha?  Really sounds rushed to me, I may or
may not have a chance to look at it in time.


Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha

2008-12-06 Thread Paul Querna

William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:

Paul Querna wrote:

Your votes please;

 ±1
 [  ]  Release httpd-2.3.0 as Alpha


Vote closes at 7:00 UTC on Tuesday December 9 2008.


 72 hours for a first alpha?  Really sounds rushed to me, I may or
may not have a chance to look at it in time.


It was 72 hours form when I tagged it.

/me shrugs.

I'm not strongly stuck to it, if its controversial, we can extend it for 
a day, but I expect its either gonna work, or have fatal flaw, it is 
just an alpha after all :)


-Paul