Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 12:21:58PM -0500, Edward Rudd wrote: From reading the bug report, it seems that there was one objection to the patch, in that it adds a new keyword, and the preference was to extend the existing AllowOverride keyword. So the next step should be to update the patch to use the existion keyword with the Options= style usage and attach that patch to the bug report. OK, At: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29310 Created an attachment (id=12022) Patch for httpd 2.0.50 with syntax AllowOverride Options= I'd appreciate any work into integrating it to upstream Apache, possibly with the 2.0 versions as well. Thanks, -- Tom -- Tom Alsberg - hacker (being the best description fitting this space) Web page: http://www.cs.huji.ac.il/~alsbergt/ DISCLAIMER: The above message does not even necessarily represent what my fingers have typed on the keyboard, save anything further.
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 05:13:45PM +0200, Sander Striker wrote: From: Andre Schild [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] As there are no other problem reportts, it's time to tag RC3 ? Correct. Can you pull in the latest apr_file_info.h from the 0.9 branch when you retag to pick up the setuid/setgid/sticky bit constant changes? Your rc2 tarball httpd-test'ed OK on a bunch of Linux boxes here (x86, amd64, ppc), thanks for RMing. joe
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Refer to http://www.apache.org/dev/apply-license.html --- especially; To apply the ALv2 to a new software distribution, include one copy of the license text by copying the file: http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txthttp://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt into a file called LICENSE in the top directory of your distribution. If the distribution is a jar or tar file, try to add the LICENSE file first in order to place it at the top of the archive. In addition, a NOTICE file should be included in the same directory as the LICENSE file. [...] So it seems that burying LICENSE (and NOTICE) within ./manual/ for our binary distributions (unpacked into /opt/asf/apache2/ or wherever) just doesn't cut it. I just checked - a normal ./configure ; make ; make install does not install the NOTICE file anywhere. In theory the NOTICE file should be installed next to the LICENCE file. The solution would then be to fix the make install target first - the RPM spec doesn't install what make install doesn't put there... Is the missing NOTICE file reason enough to hold up the release of v2.0.50? Regards, Graham --
Antw: Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
I didi take it, and now it compiles fine under win 2000. The server runs well under win2000 and nt 4.0 server. As there are no other problem reportts, it's time to tag RC3 ? André aarboard ag internet - networks - screenprint design - multimedia Egliweg 10 - Postfach 214 - CH-2560 Nidau (Switzerland) Phone +41 32 332 9714 - Fax +41 32 332 9715 www.aarboard.ch - [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 23.06.2004 21:13:10 I just commited a fix for this. Bill Andre Schild wrote: Hello, I have taken the sources as tagged in CSV and tried it to build under Windows 2000. It fails when compiling xlate.c to generate libaprutil xlate.c c:\Develop\Apache\httpd-2.0.50-rc1\srclib\apr-util\xlate\xlate.c(181) : error C2 198: 'apr_iconv_close' : Nicht genuegend Parameter uebergeben c:\Develop\Apache\httpd-2.0.50-rc1\srclib\apr-util\xlate\xlate.c(182) : error C2 198: 'apr_iconv_open' : Nicht genuegend Parameter uebergeben c:\Develop\Apache\httpd-2.0.50-rc1\srclib\apr-util\xlate\xlate.c(182) : warning C4047: '=' : Anzahl der Dereferenzierungen bei 'void *' und 'int ' unterschiedli ch The problem are the changes between 1.17.2.1 and 1.17.2.2 At two places the apr_iconv_close is called only with one argument, but in the header file, it takes a second parameter. (The pool) apr_iconv_close(convset-ich); André [EMAIL PROTECTED] 22.06.2004 22:09:39 Hi, My second attempt at preparing a 2.0.50 rc tarball... I've tagged the tree (STRIKER_2_0_50_RC2) and uploaded associated tarballs to: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ Please test and report. Thanks! Sander
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
From: Andre Schild [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2004 4:53 PM [...] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 23.06.2004 21:13:10 I just commited a fix for this. Bill [...] I didi take it, and now it compiles fine under win 2000. The server runs well under win2000 and nt 4.0 server. As there are no other problem reportts, it's time to tag RC3 ? Correct. André Sander
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
Sander Striker wrote:
My second attempt at preparing a 2.0.50 rc tarball...
I've tagged the tree (STRIKER_2_0_50_RC2) and uploaded associated
tarballs to:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
Please test and report.
The tarball refuses to build as an RPM.
The attached patch fixes this.
I need one more +1 in STATUS to commit this to the tree, any takers?
Regards,
Graham
--
--- build/rpm/httpd.spec.in 2004-02-07 20:44:30.0 +0200
+++ httpd.spec.in 2004-06-24 19:25:19.0 +0200
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
License: Apache License, Version 2.0
Group: System Environment/Daemons
BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-root
-BuildPrereq: openldap-devel, db3-devel, expat-devel, findutils, perl, pkgconfig
+BuildPrereq: openldap-devel, db4-devel, expat-devel, findutils, perl, pkgconfig
Requires: gawk, /usr/share/magic.mime, /usr/bin/find, openldap
Prereq: /sbin/chkconfig, /bin/mktemp, /bin/rm, /bin/mv
Prereq: sh-utils, textutils, /usr/sbin/useradd
@@ -335,6 +335,7 @@
%dir %{contentdir}/error
%dir %{contentdir}/error/include
%{contentdir}/icons/*
+%{contentdir}/error/README
%config(noreplace) %{contentdir}/error/*.var
%config(noreplace) %{contentdir}/error/include/*.html
@@ -344,6 +345,8 @@
%{_mandir}/man1/*
+%{_mandir}/man8/apachectl*
+%{_mandir}/man8/httpd*
%{_mandir}/man8/rotatelogs*
%{_mandir}/man8/suexec*
@@ -366,13 +369,18 @@
%files devel
%defattr(-,root,root)
%{_libdir}/libapr-0.so
+%{_libdir}/libapr-0.a
+%{_libdir}/libapr-0.la
%{_libdir}/libaprutil-0.so
+%{_libdir}/libaprutil-0.a
+%{_libdir}/libaprutil-0.la
%{_includedir}/httpd
%{_sysconfdir}/httpd/build
%{_sbindir}/apxs
%{_mandir}/man8/apxs.8*
%dir %{_libdir}/httpd/build
%{_libdir}/httpd/build/*.mk
+%{_libdir}/httpd/build/config.nice
%{_libdir}/httpd/build/instdso.sh
%{_libdir}/httpd/build/libtool
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
Jeff Trawick wrote:
--- build/rpm/httpd.spec.in2004-02-07 20:44:30.0 +0200
+++ httpd.spec.in2004-06-24 19:25:19.0 +0200
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
License: Apache License, Version 2.0
Group: System Environment/Daemons
BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-root
-BuildPrereq: openldap-devel, db3-devel, expat-devel, findutils, perl,
pkgconfig
+BuildPrereq: openldap-devel, db4-devel, expat-devel, findutils, perl,
pkgconfig
curious: why change the db level?
db4 seems to be the latest version widely deployed among recent RPM
based systems. db3-devel for example is not available for RHEL3 to my
knowledge.
Ideally the most recent stable httpd version released should use the
most recent stable dependancies available. If vendors want to change
this to match vendor specific behavior that's fine, but I think the
official Apache releases should try be as up to date as possible.
Regards,
Graham
--
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
At 12:33 PM 6/24/2004, Graham Leggett wrote: Sander Striker wrote: My second attempt at preparing a 2.0.50 rc tarball... I've tagged the tree (STRIKER_2_0_50_RC2) and uploaded associated tarballs to: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ Please test and report. The tarball refuses to build as an RPM. The attached patch fixes this. I need one more +1 in STATUS to commit this to the tree, any takers? Graham, silly question. When it deploys as an RPM, do we also copy LICENSE and NOTICE to some appropriate spot? This tripped me in the latest updates - was moving the LICENSE and not NOTICE in the time since that second file was introduced. Bill
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Graham, silly question. When it deploys as an RPM, do we also copy LICENSE and NOTICE to some appropriate spot? This tripped me in the latest updates - was moving the LICENSE and not NOTICE in the time since that second file was introduced. Just checked: Neither our RPM nor the Redhat one (on which our RPM was originally based) include either LICENCE or NOTICE. What directories do these files get installed to normally by Apache's make install? Regards, Graham --
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
At 01:18 PM 6/24/2004, Graham Leggett wrote: William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Graham, silly question. When it deploys as an RPM, do we also copy LICENSE and NOTICE to some appropriate spot? This tripped me in the latest updates - was moving the LICENSE and not NOTICE in the time since that second file was introduced. Just checked: Neither our RPM nor the Redhat one (on which our RPM was originally based) include either LICENCE or NOTICE. What directories do these files get installed to normally by Apache's make install? Heh, maybe they don't. In the win32 installer and build system we drop them into the target directory, alongside the bin, htdocs, modules directories. On unix, we do toss LICENSE into $target/manual/ - but we are missing NOTICE in the build system. Perhaps that's the start (maybe the end) of fixing this for your rpm? Where in an httpd install, i'd say alongside. When installing into the /usr/ or /usr/local/ space? that's a good question. Bill
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Heh, maybe they don't. In the win32 installer and build system we drop them into the target directory, alongside the bin, htdocs, modules directories. On unix, we do toss LICENSE into $target/manual/ - but we are missing NOTICE in the build system. Perhaps that's the start (maybe the end) of fixing this for your rpm? Where in an httpd install, i'd say alongside. When installing into the /usr/ or /usr/local/ space? that's a good question. Ok, looked again to be sure - the LICENSE file is included, and is placed in the RPM build inside /usr/share/doc/httpd-2.0.50/LICENSE. The NOTICE file seems to be missing. Just building it again to see where the install puts the NOTICE file... Regards, Graham --
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
Referring to our own license's redistribution requirements; 4. Redistribution. You may reproduce and distribute copies of the Work or Derivative Works thereof in any medium, with or without modifications, and in Source or Object form, provided that You meet the following conditions: * You must give any other recipients of the Work or Derivative Works a copy of this License; and * You must cause any modified files to carry prominent notices stating that You changed the files; and * You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works that You distribute, all copyright, patent, trademark, and attribution notices from the Source form of the Work, excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of the Derivative Works; and * If the Work includes a NOTICE text file as part of its distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or, within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed as modifying the License. It's pretty clear that LICENSE and NOTICE must accompany any distribution, from the ASF or a third party, e.g. an RPM. Refer to http://www.apache.org/dev/apply-license.html --- especially; To apply the ALv2 to a new software distribution, include one copy of the license text by copying the file: http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txthttp://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt into a file called LICENSE in the top directory of your distribution. If the distribution is a jar or tar file, try to add the LICENSE file first in order to place it at the top of the archive. In addition, a NOTICE file should be included in the same directory as the LICENSE file. [...] So it seems that burying LICENSE (and NOTICE) within ./manual/ for our binary distributions (unpacked into /opt/asf/apache2/ or wherever) just doesn't cut it. But obviously, if I'm dropping httpd into /usr/local/ (bin/, lib/, etc) this would be patently absurd to place LICENSE into /usr/local/. Thoughts? At 02:16 PM 6/24/2004, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: At 01:18 PM 6/24/2004, Graham Leggett wrote: William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Graham, silly question. When it deploys as an RPM, do we also copy LICENSE and NOTICE to some appropriate spot? This tripped me in the latest updates - was moving the LICENSE and not NOTICE in the time since that second file was introduced. Just checked: Neither our RPM nor the Redhat one (on which our RPM was originally based) include either LICENCE or NOTICE. What directories do these files get installed to normally by Apache's make install? Heh, maybe they don't. In the win32 installer and build system we drop them into the target directory, alongside the bin, htdocs, modules directories. On unix, we do toss LICENSE into $target/manual/ - but we are missing NOTICE in the build system. Perhaps that's the start (maybe the end) of fixing this for your rpm? Where in an httpd install, i'd say alongside. When installing into the /usr/ or /usr/local/ space? that's a good question. Bill
RE: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
Hello, I have taken the sources as tagged in CSV and tried it to build under Windows 2000. It fails when compiling xlate.c to generate libaprutil xlate.c c:\Develop\Apache\httpd-2.0.50-rc1\srclib\apr-util\xlate\xlate.c(181) : error C2 198: 'apr_iconv_close' : Nicht genuegend Parameter uebergeben c:\Develop\Apache\httpd-2.0.50-rc1\srclib\apr-util\xlate\xlate.c(182) : error C2 198: 'apr_iconv_open' : Nicht genuegend Parameter uebergeben c:\Develop\Apache\httpd-2.0.50-rc1\srclib\apr-util\xlate\xlate.c(182) : warning C4047: '=' : Anzahl der Dereferenzierungen bei 'void *' und 'int ' unterschiedli ch The problem are the changes between 1.17.2.1 and 1.17.2.2 At two places the apr_iconv_close is called only with one argument, but in the header file, it takes a second parameter. (The pool) apr_iconv_close(convset-ich); André [EMAIL PROTECTED] 22.06.2004 22:09:39 Hi, My second attempt at preparing a 2.0.50 rc tarball... I've tagged the tree (STRIKER_2_0_50_RC2) and uploaded associated tarballs to: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ Please test and report. Thanks! Sander
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
On Tue, Jun 22, 2004 at 10:09:39PM +0200, Sander Striker wrote: Hi, My second attempt at preparing a 2.0.50 rc tarball... I've tagged the tree (STRIKER_2_0_50_RC2) and uploaded associated tarballs to: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ Please test and report. Asside from a little tinkering with APR needed to make it build with CFLAGS=-D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE (I'll mail apr-dev in a few mins) it works fine on Debian Linux, 2.6 kernel, with IPv6 :) -- Colm MacCárthaighPublic Key: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
Sander Striker wrote: Hi, My second attempt at preparing a 2.0.50 rc tarball... I've tagged the tree (STRIKER_2_0_50_RC2) and uploaded associated tarballs to: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ Please test and report. looks good to me on AIX 5.1 and Solaris 9...
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
Sander Striker wrote: Hi, My second attempt at preparing a 2.0.50 rc tarball... I've tagged the tree (STRIKER_2_0_50_RC2) and uploaded associated tarballs to: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ Please test and report. plays nice with mod_perl-2.0 on fedora core 1. also plays nice with the perl-framework. good work. --Geoff
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
On Tue, Jun 22, 2004 at 10:09:39PM +0200, Sander Striker wrote: Hi, My second attempt at preparing a 2.0.50 rc tarball... OK, I'll be more direct now (my last mail to this list has apparently been ignored). Can you please try to get this: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29310 into that release? Thanks, -- Tom -- Tom Alsberg - hacker (being the best description fitting this space) Web page: http://www.cs.huji.ac.il/~alsbergt/ DISCLAIMER: The above message does not even necessarily represent what my fingers have typed on the keyboard, save anything further.
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
Tom Alsberg wrote: On Tue, Jun 22, 2004 at 10:09:39PM +0200, Sander Striker wrote: Hi, My second attempt at preparing a 2.0.50 rc tarball... OK, I'll be more direct now (my last mail to this list has apparently been ignored). Can you please try to get this: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29310 into that release? the process for adding new features to Apache 2.0 is to first integrate the feature into Apache 2.1 (cvs HEAD). after that, the feature is voted upon for inclusion in the stable 2.0 branch. from the bug report, it sounds like not only is the feature not in 2.1, but that it hasn't been decided what its final form will be. so there are a few steps left to overcome for this feature yet. that, and although this is really the call of the release manager, in general I would expect that once a release candidate is tagged changes to the tree should be minimal (doc changes, for example) or extreme (like just-discovered security flaws, in which case the tag is probably tossed and the release number skipped). or something like that :) HTH --Geoff
RE: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 08:42:14 +0200, Andre Schild wrote: Hello, It fails when compiling xlate.c to generate libaprutil xlate.c c:\Develop\Apache\httpd-2.0.50-rc1\srclib\apr-util\xlate\xlate.c(181) : error C2 198: 'apr_iconv_close' : Nicht genuegend Parameter uebergeben c:\Develop\Apache\httpd-2.0.50-rc1\srclib\apr-util\xlate\xlate.c(182) : error C2 198: 'apr_iconv_open' : Nicht genuegend Parameter uebergeben c:\Develop\Apache\httpd-2.0.50-rc1\srclib\apr-util\xlate\xlate.c(182) : warning C4047: '=' : Anzahl der Dereferenzierungen bei 'void *' und 'int ' unterschiedli ch Are you sure you have the rc2 tag? it looks like you have the rc1 directory name there?.. rc1 is NOT httpd 2.0 it was accidentally a 2.1 head tarball. The problem are the changes between 1.17.2.1 and 1.17.2.2 At two places the apr_iconv_close is called only with one argument, but in the header file, it takes a second parameter. (The pool) apr_iconv_close(convset-ich);
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 11:30:22AM -0400, Geoffrey Young wrote: the process for adding new features to Apache 2.0 is to first integrate the feature into Apache 2.1 (cvs HEAD). after that, the feature is voted upon for inclusion in the stable 2.0 branch. Yes, I understand that... So to ask differently: Any work in progress to get this into the 2.1-HEAD branch? I just don't want that patch to sit there dead. Since my mail about it got no response, I would hope to know what's going on with it. from the bug report, it sounds like not only is the feature not in 2.1, but that it hasn't been decided what its final form will be. Given that nobody has said so much more, I'd assume nobody objects to the current form of the patch. If there's a problem - please don't just forget it because the current form isn't to your liking... so there are a few steps left to overcome for this feature yet. OK. Any forum which might be more appropriate, if so, to discuss changes to the 2.1-HEAD branch? -- Tom -- Tom Alsberg - hacker (being the best description fitting this space) Web page: http://www.cs.huji.ac.il/~alsbergt/ DISCLAIMER: The above message does not even necessarily represent what my fingers have typed on the keyboard, save anything further.
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 20:12:02 +0300, Tom Alsberg wrote: On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 11:30:22AM -0400, Geoffrey Young wrote: So to ask differently: Any work in progress to get this into the 2.1-HEAD branch? I just don't want that patch to sit there dead. Given that nobody has said so much more, I'd assume nobody objects to the current form of the patch. If there's a problem - please don't just forget it because the current form isn't to your liking... From reading the bug report, it seems that there was one objection to the patch, in that it adds a new keyword, and the preference was to extend the existing AllowOverride keyword. So the next step should be to update the patch to use the existion keyword with the Options= style usage and attach that patch to the bug report. OK. Any forum which might be more appropriate, if so, to discuss changes to the 2.1-HEAD branch? This mailing list is the perfect place to discuss changes to the 2.1-HEAD branch. -- Tom Edward Rudd
Antw: RE: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
Hello Eddie, 198: 'apr_iconv_open' : Nicht genuegend Parameter uebergeben c:\Develop\Apache\httpd-2.0.50-rc1\srclib\apr-util\xlate\xlate.c(182) : warning C4047: '=' : Anzahl der Dereferenzierungen bei 'void *' und 'int ' unterschiedli ch Are you sure you have the rc2 tag? it looks like you have the rc1 directory name there?.. rc1 is NOT httpd 2.0 it was accidentally a 2.1 head tarball. No, even as on my harddisk it's named RC1, I have checked out rc2. André aarboard ag internet - networks - screenprint design - multimedia Egliweg 10 - Postfach 214 - CH-2560 Nidau (Switzerland) Phone +41 32 332 9714 - Fax +41 32 332 9715 www.aarboard.ch - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
At 12:12 PM 6/23/2004, Tom Alsberg wrote: On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 11:30:22AM -0400, Geoffrey Young wrote: the process for adding new features to Apache 2.0 is to first integrate the feature into Apache 2.1 (cvs HEAD). after that, the feature is voted upon for inclusion in the stable 2.0 branch. Yes, I understand that... So to ask differently: Any work in progress to get this into the 2.1-HEAD branch? I just don't want that patch to sit there dead. My only confusion is what your patch for AllowOverrideOptions does, that AllowOverride doesn't accomplish. I've too few cycles to dig deeply, but could you provide a trivial example? Just as a footnote, even if this were integrated into 2.1 today, it wouldn't be backported as a new feature this close to release, and may not be backported at all, as the developers are trying to simply get 2.0 stable and focus energy with new features into 2.1-dev, that version will ultimately become an httpd-2.2.0 release once the development tree is stable. (Then, as we release 2.2 versions, we will be dropping new-feature energy at a 2.3-dev tree, much like Linux and Perl projects do.) Bill
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
I just commited a fix for this. Bill Andre Schild wrote: Hello, I have taken the sources as tagged in CSV and tried it to build under Windows 2000. It fails when compiling xlate.c to generate libaprutil xlate.c c:\Develop\Apache\httpd-2.0.50-rc1\srclib\apr-util\xlate\xlate.c(181) : error C2 198: 'apr_iconv_close' : Nicht genuegend Parameter uebergeben c:\Develop\Apache\httpd-2.0.50-rc1\srclib\apr-util\xlate\xlate.c(182) : error C2 198: 'apr_iconv_open' : Nicht genuegend Parameter uebergeben c:\Develop\Apache\httpd-2.0.50-rc1\srclib\apr-util\xlate\xlate.c(182) : warning C4047: '=' : Anzahl der Dereferenzierungen bei 'void *' und 'int ' unterschiedli ch The problem are the changes between 1.17.2.1 and 1.17.2.2 At two places the apr_iconv_close is called only with one argument, but in the header file, it takes a second parameter. (The pool) apr_iconv_close(convset-ich); André [EMAIL PROTECTED] 22.06.2004 22:09:39 Hi, My second attempt at preparing a 2.0.50 rc tarball... I've tagged the tree (STRIKER_2_0_50_RC2) and uploaded associated tarballs to: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ Please test and report. Thanks! Sander
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 13:29:21 -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: My only confusion is what your patch for AllowOverrideOptions does, that AllowOverride doesn't accomplish. I've too few cycles to dig deeply, but could you provide a trivial example? From reading the bug report, Tom's patch allows the specification of specific (by name) configuration options that can be used in .htaccess, instead of configuration option groups. Bill
Re: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing
It compiles and works without any problems on SuSE 9.0 Professional (with MPM prefork). Sascha - Original Message - From: Sander Striker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2004 10:09 PM Subject: Apache HTTP Server 2.0.50-rc2 tarballs available for testing Hi, My second attempt at preparing a 2.0.50 rc tarball... I've tagged the tree (STRIKER_2_0_50_RC2) and uploaded associated tarballs to: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ Please test and report. Thanks! Sander
