Re: h2_proxy_util.c, is this going make 2.4.21?

2016-06-16 Thread Steffen 

Saw last minute change mod-http2 to version 1.5.11.

Running now:

mod_http2 (v1.5.11, feats=, nghttp2 1.11.1), initializing...

-Original Message- 
From: Steffen

Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2016 11:57 AM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: h2_proxy_util.c, is this going make 2.4.21?


Running now 2.4.21-dev  pulled today (wednesday), exported revision
1748510.


So far all good.






On Wednesday 15/06/2016 at 01:11, Gregg Smith  wrote:

Hi Steffen,

Attached is a svn pull from about 1 hour after I committed my changes. No 
need to wait for tag if you would rather get a jump on testing. To maybe 
hit the 3 or 4 days after when you find bugs.


Gregg



On 6/14/2016 2:17 AM, Steffen wrote:



Then I wait for the Tag.

You know with me, that http2 in real live testing needs extended time 
for testing. Happened more then once  that a crash/issue was showing 
up,after 3/4 days. So hope that 72 hours is enough.


Steffen


On Tuesday 14/06/2016 at 11:09, Stefan Eissing  wrote:


Steffen,

unfortunately not. They now contains changes that only compile with a 
2.4.21 httpd.


-Stefan




Am 14.06.2016 um 11:06 schrieb Steffen <i...@apachelounge.com>:

I rather like to test before tagging.

Can you apply these changes for my testing also to  Git ?

Steffen

On Tuesday 14/06/2016 at 10:54, Stefan Eissing wrote:



I just backported the h2_proxy_util.c change in r1748359. It also 
uses the back ported ap_cstr_casecmp* instead of its own copies. I 
tried to update the win build files appropriately, but am unable to 
check the correctness.


Gregg: please commit your changes when awake enough. Hopefully Jim 
can keep his fingers from the tag button long enough...


Cheers,

   Stefan




Am 13.06.2016 um 22:40 schrieb William A Rowe Jr 
<wr...@rowe-clan.net>:


On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Gregg Smith <g...@gknw.net> wrote:
I have the to connect this module in the traditional windows build 
but as of right now it's using h2_util.c which Bill had an  objection 
to. See his comments 
http://marc.info/?l=apache-httpd-dev=146543811201820=2


So to me that seems to be a -1 to mod_proxy_http2, at minimum on 
Windows. In trunk Stefan seems to have chosen option 3 in Bill's 
list and that is h2_proxy_util.c.


If I knew that was going to be backported I would add the rest of 
the bits needed to use h2_proxy_util.c. If it is not going to make 
it, then I will not commit anything and there will be no 
mod_proxy_http2 in 2.4.21 on Windows. If this gets in overnight  and 
you tag in the morning, I may not be out of bed yet due to the  time 
difference.


That's where my concern is. Make sense?

Shouldn't be a concern. I'm mildly concerned about the  single-level 
namespace
collisions on Unix, but because the .so object is pre-linked to  its 
own functions
before anything is imported/exported, mod_http2.so should be using 
h2_utils.o
and mod_proxy_http2.so should be using h2_proxy_utils.o, even 
without any
additional namespace protection. A third module trying to use the 
functions of
those two modules could cause headaches, but that can be addressed 
later.


Windows has two-level namespaces, so there is no ambiguity between 
symbols
in one .so (.dll) and a second, unless you are simultaneously 
linking a module

to both of these modules.

I accept Stefan's proposed fix for the time being, and we can 
certainly make

this simpler on trunk in the future.

Cheers,

Bill

Re: h2_proxy_util.c, is this going make 2.4.21?

2016-06-15 Thread Jim Jagielski 
Thx!

I'll plan on T tomorrow w/ a release on Monday.

> On Jun 15, 2016, at 5:57 AM, Steffen  wrote:
> 
> 
> Running now 2.4.21-dev  pulled today (wednesday), exported revision 1748510.
> 
> 
> So far all good.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Wednesday 15/06/2016 at 01:11, Gregg Smith  wrote:
>> Hi Steffen,
>> 
>> Attached is a svn pull from about 1 hour after I committed my changes. No 
>> need to wait for tag if you would rather get a jump on testing. To maybe hit 
>> the 3 or 4 days after when you find bugs.
>> 
>> Gregg
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 6/14/2016 2:17 AM, Steffen wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Then I wait for the Tag.
>>> 
>>> You know with me, that http2 in real live testing needs extended time  for 
>>> testing. Happened more then once  that a crash/issue was showing  up,after 
>>> 3/4 days. So hope that 72 hours is enough.
>>> 
>>> Steffen
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Tuesday 14/06/2016 at 11:09, Stefan Eissing  wrote:
 
 Steffen,
 
 unfortunately not. They now contains changes that only compile with a  
 2.4.21 httpd.
 
 -Stefan
 
> 
> 
> Am 14.06.2016 um 11:06 schrieb Steffen :
> 
> I rather like to test before tagging.
> 
> Can you apply these changes for my testing also to  Git ?
> 
> Steffen
> 
> On Tuesday 14/06/2016 at 10:54, Stefan Eissing wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> I just backported the h2_proxy_util.c change in r1748359. It also  uses 
>> the back ported ap_cstr_casecmp* instead of its own copies. I  tried to 
>> update the win build files appropriately, but am unable to  check the 
>> correctness.
>> 
>> Gregg: please commit your changes when awake enough. Hopefully Jim  can 
>> keep his fingers from the tag button long enough...
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> 
>>   Stefan
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Am 13.06.2016 um 22:40 schrieb William A Rowe Jr  :
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Gregg Smith  wrote:
>>> I have the to connect this module in the traditional windows build  but 
>>> as of right now it's using h2_util.c which Bill had an  objection to. 
>>> See his comments 
>>> http://marc.info/?l=apache-httpd-dev=146543811201820=2
>>> 
>>> So to me that seems to be a -1 to mod_proxy_http2, at minimum on  
>>> Windows. In trunk Stefan seems to have chosen option 3 in Bill's  list 
>>> and that is h2_proxy_util.c.
>>> 
>>> If I knew that was going to be backported I would add the rest of  the 
>>> bits needed to use h2_proxy_util.c. If it is not going to make  it, 
>>> then I will not commit anything and there will be no  mod_proxy_http2 
>>> in 2.4.21 on Windows. If this gets in overnight  and you tag in the 
>>> morning, I may not be out of bed yet due to the  time difference.
>>> 
>>> That's where my concern is. Make sense?
>>> 
>>> Shouldn't be a concern. I'm mildly concerned about the  single-level 
>>> namespace
>>> collisions on Unix, but because the .so object is pre-linked to  its 
>>> own functions
>>> before anything is imported/exported, mod_http2.so should be using  
>>> h2_utils.o
>>> and mod_proxy_http2.so should be using h2_proxy_utils.o, even  without 
>>> any
>>> additional namespace protection. A third module trying to use the  
>>> functions of
>>> those two modules could cause headaches, but that can be addressed  
>>> later.
>>> 
>>> Windows has two-level namespaces, so there is no ambiguity between  
>>> symbols
>>> in one .so (.dll) and a second, unless you are simultaneously  linking 
>>> a module
>>> to both of these modules.
>>> 
>>> I accept Stefan's proposed fix for the time being, and we can  
>>> certainly make
>>> this simpler on trunk in the future.
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> 
>>> Bill
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 
 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
>

Re: h2_proxy_util.c, is this going make 2.4.21?

2016-06-15 Thread Steffen 


Running now 2.4.21-dev  pulled today (wednesday), exported revision 
1748510.



So far all good.






On Wednesday 15/06/2016 at 01:11, Gregg Smith  wrote:

Hi Steffen,

Attached is a svn pull from about 1 hour after I committed my changes. 
No need to wait for tag if you would rather get a jump on testing. To 
maybe hit the 3 or 4 days after when you find bugs.


Gregg



On 6/14/2016 2:17 AM, Steffen wrote:



Then I wait for the Tag.

You know with me, that http2 in real live testing needs extended time  
for testing. Happened more then once  that a crash/issue was showing  
up,after 3/4 days. So hope that 72 hours is enough.


Steffen


On Tuesday 14/06/2016 at 11:09, Stefan Eissing  wrote:


Steffen,

unfortunately not. They now contains changes that only compile with a  
2.4.21 httpd.


-Stefan




Am 14.06.2016 um 11:06 schrieb Steffen :

I rather like to test before tagging.

Can you apply these changes for my testing also to  Git ?

Steffen

On Tuesday 14/06/2016 at 10:54, Stefan Eissing wrote:



I just backported the h2_proxy_util.c change in r1748359. It also  
uses the back ported ap_cstr_casecmp* instead of its own copies. I  
tried to update the win build files appropriately, but am unable to  
check the correctness.


Gregg: please commit your changes when awake enough. Hopefully Jim  
can keep his fingers from the tag button long enough...


Cheers,

   Stefan




Am 13.06.2016 um 22:40 schrieb William A Rowe Jr  
:


On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Gregg Smith  wrote:
I have the to connect this module in the traditional windows build  
but as of right now it's using h2_util.c which Bill had an  objection 
to. See his comments 
http://marc.info/?l=apache-httpd-dev=146543811201820=2


So to me that seems to be a -1 to mod_proxy_http2, at minimum on  
Windows. In trunk Stefan seems to have chosen option 3 in Bill's  list 
and that is h2_proxy_util.c.


If I knew that was going to be backported I would add the rest of  the 
bits needed to use h2_proxy_util.c. If it is not going to make  it, 
then I will not commit anything and there will be no  mod_proxy_http2 
in 2.4.21 on Windows. If this gets in overnight  and you tag in the 
morning, I may not be out of bed yet due to the  time difference.


That's where my concern is. Make sense?

Shouldn't be a concern. I'm mildly concerned about the  single-level 
namespace
collisions on Unix, but because the .so object is pre-linked to  its 
own functions
before anything is imported/exported, mod_http2.so should be using  
h2_utils.o
and mod_proxy_http2.so should be using h2_proxy_utils.o, even  without 
any
additional namespace protection. A third module trying to use the  
functions of
those two modules could cause headaches, but that can be addressed  
later.


Windows has two-level namespaces, so there is no ambiguity between  
symbols
in one .so (.dll) and a second, unless you are simultaneously  linking 
a module

to both of these modules.

I accept Stefan's proposed fix for the time being, and we can  
certainly make

this simpler on trunk in the future.

Cheers,

Bill

Re: h2_proxy_util.c, is this going make 2.4.21?

2016-06-14 Thread Gregg Smith 

sorry, that was not supposed to go to list.

On 6/14/2016 4:01 PM, Gregg Smith wrote:

Hi Steffen,

Attached is a svn pull from about 1 hour after I committed my changes. 
No need to wait for tag if you would rather get a jump on testing. To 
maybe hit the 3 or 4 days after when you find bugs.


Gregg



On 6/14/2016 2:17 AM, Steffen wrote:


Then I wait for the Tag.

You know with me, that http2 in real live testing needs extended time 
for testing. Happened more then once  that a crash/issue was showing 
up,after 3/4 days. So hope that 72 hours is enough.


Steffen


On Tuesday 14/06/2016 at 11:09, Stefan Eissing  wrote:

Steffen,

unfortunately not. They now contains changes that only compile with 
a 2.4.21 httpd.


-Stefan



Am 14.06.2016 um 11:06 schrieb Steffen :

I rather like to test before tagging.

Can you apply these changes for my testing also to  Git ?

Steffen

On Tuesday 14/06/2016 at 10:54, Stefan Eissing wrote:


I just backported the h2_proxy_util.c change in r1748359. It also 
uses the back ported ap_cstr_casecmp* instead of its own copies. I 
tried to update the win build files appropriately, but am unable 
to check the correctness.


Gregg: please commit your changes when awake enough. Hopefully Jim 
can keep his fingers from the tag button long enough...


Cheers,

   Stefan



Am 13.06.2016 um 22:40 schrieb William A Rowe Jr 
:


On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Gregg Smith  wrote:
I have the to connect this module in the traditional windows 
build but as of right now it's using h2_util.c which Bill had an 
objection to. See his comments 
http://marc.info/?l=apache-httpd-dev=146543811201820=2


So to me that seems to be a -1 to mod_proxy_http2, at minimum on 
Windows. In trunk Stefan seems to have chosen option 3 in Bill's 
list and that is h2_proxy_util.c.


If I knew that was going to be backported I would add the rest of 
the bits needed to use h2_proxy_util.c. If it is not going to 
make it, then I will not commit anything and there will be no 
mod_proxy_http2 in 2.4.21 on Windows. If this gets in overnight 
and you tag in the morning, I may not be out of bed yet due to 
the time difference.


That's where my concern is. Make sense?

Shouldn't be a concern. I'm mildly concerned about the 
single-level namespace
collisions on Unix, but because the .so object is pre-linked to 
its own functions
before anything is imported/exported, mod_http2.so should be 
using h2_utils.o
and mod_proxy_http2.so should be using h2_proxy_utils.o, even 
without any
additional namespace protection. A third module trying to use the 
functions of
those two modules could cause headaches, but that can be 
addressed later.


Windows has two-level namespaces, so there is no ambiguity 
between symbols
in one .so (.dll) and a second, unless you are simultaneously 
linking a module

to both of these modules.

I accept Stefan's proposed fix for the time being, and we can 
certainly make

this simpler on trunk in the future.

Cheers,

Bill

Re: h2_proxy_util.c, is this going make 2.4.21?

2016-06-14 Thread Stefan Eissing 
Thanks, Gregg!

> Am 14.06.2016 um 17:27 schrieb Gregg Smith :
> 
> I've committed my changes and the module builds and loads but that is as far 
> as I got.
> 
> Thanks everyone,
> 
> Gregg
> 
> On 6/14/2016 4:47 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote:
>>> Am 14.06.2016 um 13:18 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>> 
>>> Let's hold off on the tag then... How about if I bump the T
>>> from today to Thurs?
>> +1
>> 
>> I would like to have any Window build issues detected and resolved before 
>> the tag.
>> 
>> -Stefan
>> 
 On Jun 14, 2016, at 5:17 AM, Steffen  wrote:
 
 Then I wait for the Tag.
 
 You know with me, that http2 in real live testing needs extended time for 
 testing. Happened more then once  that a crash/issue was showing up,after 
 3/4 days. So hope that 72 hours is enough.
 
 Steffen
 
 On Tuesday 14/06/2016 at 11:09, Stefan Eissing wrote:
> Steffen,
> 
> unfortunately not. They now contains changes that only compile with a 
> 2.4.21 httpd.
> 
> -Stefan
> 
>> Am 14.06.2016 um 11:06 schrieb Steffen:
>> 
>> I rather like to test before tagging.
>> 
>> Can you apply these changes for my testing also to Git ?
>> 
>> Steffen
>> 
>> On Tuesday 14/06/2016 at 10:54, Stefan Eissing wrote:
>>> I just backported the h2_proxy_util.c change in r1748359. It also uses 
>>> the back ported ap_cstr_casecmp* instead of its own copies. I tried to 
>>> update the win build files appropriately, but am unable to check the 
>>> correctness.
>>> 
>>> Gregg: please commit your changes when awake enough. Hopefully Jim can 
>>> keep his fingers from the tag button long enough...
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> 
>>> Stefan
>>> 
 Am 13.06.2016 um 22:40 schrieb William A Rowe Jr:
 
 On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Gregg Smith  wrote:
 I have the to connect this module in the traditional windows build but 
 as of right now it's using h2_util.c which Bill had an objection to. 
 See his comments 
 http://marc.info/?l=apache-httpd-dev=146543811201820=2
 
 So to me that seems to be a -1 to mod_proxy_http2, at minimum on 
 Windows. In trunk Stefan seems to have chosen option 3 in Bill's list 
 and that is h2_proxy_util.c.
 
 If I knew that was going to be backported I would add the rest of the 
 bits needed to use h2_proxy_util.c. If it is not going to make it, 
 then I will not commit anything and there will be no mod_proxy_http2 
 in 2.4.21 on Windows. If this gets in overnight and you tag in the 
 morning, I may not be out of bed yet due to the time difference.
 
 That's where my concern is. Make sense?
 
 Shouldn't be a concern. I'm mildly concerned about the single-level 
 namespace
 collisions on Unix, but because the .so object is pre-linked to its 
 own functions
 before anything is imported/exported, mod_http2.so should be using 
 h2_utils.o
 and mod_proxy_http2.so should be using h2_proxy_utils.o, even without 
 any
 additional namespace protection. A third module trying to use the 
 functions of
 those two modules could cause headaches, but that can be addressed 
 later.
 
 Windows has two-level namespaces, so there is no ambiguity between 
 symbols
 in one .so (.dll) and a second, unless you are simultaneously linking 
 a module
 to both of these modules.
 
 I accept Stefan's proposed fix for the time being, and we can 
 certainly make
 this simpler on trunk in the future.
 
 Cheers,
 
 Bill
 
 
>> 
 
>

Re: h2_proxy_util.c, is this going make 2.4.21?

2016-06-14 Thread Gregg Smith 
I've committed my changes and the module builds and loads but that is as 
far as I got.


Thanks everyone,

Gregg

On 6/14/2016 4:47 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote:

Am 14.06.2016 um 13:18 schrieb Jim Jagielski:

Let's hold off on the tag then... How about if I bump the T
from today to Thurs?

+1

I would like to have any Window build issues detected and resolved before the 
tag.

-Stefan


On Jun 14, 2016, at 5:17 AM, Steffen  wrote:

Then I wait for the Tag.

You know with me, that http2 in real live testing needs extended time for 
testing. Happened more then once  that a crash/issue was showing up,after 3/4 
days. So hope that 72 hours is enough.

Steffen

On Tuesday 14/06/2016 at 11:09, Stefan Eissing wrote:

Steffen,

unfortunately not. They now contains changes that only compile with a 2.4.21 
httpd.

-Stefan


Am 14.06.2016 um 11:06 schrieb Steffen:

I rather like to test before tagging.

Can you apply these changes for my testing also to Git ?

Steffen

On Tuesday 14/06/2016 at 10:54, Stefan Eissing wrote:

I just backported the h2_proxy_util.c change in r1748359. It also uses the back 
ported ap_cstr_casecmp* instead of its own copies. I tried to update the win 
build files appropriately, but am unable to check the correctness.

Gregg: please commit your changes when awake enough. Hopefully Jim can keep his 
fingers from the tag button long enough...

Cheers,

 Stefan


Am 13.06.2016 um 22:40 schrieb William A Rowe Jr:

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Gregg Smith  wrote:
I have the to connect this module in the traditional windows build but as of right now 
it's using h2_util.c which Bill had an objection to. See his comments 
http://marc.info/?l=apache-httpd-dev=146543811201820=2

So to me that seems to be a -1 to mod_proxy_http2, at minimum on Windows. In 
trunk Stefan seems to have chosen option 3 in Bill's list and that is 
h2_proxy_util.c.

If I knew that was going to be backported I would add the rest of the bits 
needed to use h2_proxy_util.c. If it is not going to make it, then I will not 
commit anything and there will be no mod_proxy_http2 in 2.4.21 on Windows. If 
this gets in overnight and you tag in the morning, I may not be out of bed yet 
due to the time difference.

That's where my concern is. Make sense?

Shouldn't be a concern. I'm mildly concerned about the single-level namespace
collisions on Unix, but because the .so object is pre-linked to its own 
functions
before anything is imported/exported, mod_http2.so should be using h2_utils.o
and mod_proxy_http2.so should be using h2_proxy_utils.o, even without any
additional namespace protection. A third module trying to use the functions of
those two modules could cause headaches, but that can be addressed later.

Windows has two-level namespaces, so there is no ambiguity between symbols
in one .so (.dll) and a second, unless you are simultaneously linking a module
to both of these modules.

I accept Stefan's proposed fix for the time being, and we can certainly make
this simpler on trunk in the future.

Cheers,

Bill

Re: h2_proxy_util.c, is this going make 2.4.21?

2016-06-14 Thread Stefan Eissing 

> Am 14.06.2016 um 13:18 schrieb Jim Jagielski :
> 
> Let's hold off on the tag then... How about if I bump the T
> from today to Thurs?

+1

I would like to have any Window build issues detected and resolved before the 
tag.

-Stefan

>> On Jun 14, 2016, at 5:17 AM, Steffen  wrote:
>> 
>> Then I wait for the Tag.
>> 
>> You know with me, that http2 in real live testing needs extended time for 
>> testing. Happened more then once  that a crash/issue was showing up,after 
>> 3/4 days. So hope that 72 hours is enough.
>> 
>> Steffen
>> 
>> On Tuesday 14/06/2016 at 11:09, Stefan Eissing wrote: 
>>> Steffen,
>>> 
>>> unfortunately not. They now contains changes that only compile with a 
>>> 2.4.21 httpd. 
>>> 
>>> -Stefan
>>> 
 Am 14.06.2016 um 11:06 schrieb Steffen :
 
 I rather like to test before tagging.
 
 Can you apply these changes for my testing also to Git ?
 
 Steffen
 
 On Tuesday 14/06/2016 at 10:54, Stefan Eissing wrote: 
> I just backported the h2_proxy_util.c change in r1748359. It also uses 
> the back ported ap_cstr_casecmp* instead of its own copies. I tried to 
> update the win build files appropriately, but am unable to check the 
> correctness.
> 
> Gregg: please commit your changes when awake enough. Hopefully Jim can 
> keep his fingers from the tag button long enough...
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Stefan
> 
>> Am 13.06.2016 um 22:40 schrieb William A Rowe Jr :
>> 
>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Gregg Smith  wrote:
>> I have the to connect this module in the traditional windows build but 
>> as of right now it's using h2_util.c which Bill had an objection to. See 
>> his comments http://marc.info/?l=apache-httpd-dev=146543811201820=2
>> 
>> So to me that seems to be a -1 to mod_proxy_http2, at minimum on 
>> Windows. In trunk Stefan seems to have chosen option 3 in Bill's list 
>> and that is h2_proxy_util.c.
>> 
>> If I knew that was going to be backported I would add the rest of the 
>> bits needed to use h2_proxy_util.c. If it is not going to make it, then 
>> I will not commit anything and there will be no mod_proxy_http2 in 
>> 2.4.21 on Windows. If this gets in overnight and you tag in the morning, 
>> I may not be out of bed yet due to the time difference.
>> 
>> That's where my concern is. Make sense?
>> 
>> Shouldn't be a concern. I'm mildly concerned about the single-level 
>> namespace
>> collisions on Unix, but because the .so object is pre-linked to its own 
>> functions
>> before anything is imported/exported, mod_http2.so should be using 
>> h2_utils.o
>> and mod_proxy_http2.so should be using h2_proxy_utils.o, even without any
>> additional namespace protection. A third module trying to use the 
>> functions of
>> those two modules could cause headaches, but that can be addressed later.
>> 
>> Windows has two-level namespaces, so there is no ambiguity between 
>> symbols
>> in one .so (.dll) and a second, unless you are simultaneously linking a 
>> module
>> to both of these modules.
>> 
>> I accept Stefan's proposed fix for the time being, and we can certainly 
>> make
>> this simpler on trunk in the future.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> Bill
>> 
>> 
> 
 
 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>

Re: h2_proxy_util.c, is this going make 2.4.21?

2016-06-14 Thread Jim Jagielski 
Let's hold off on the tag then... How about if I bump the T
from today to Thurs?

> On Jun 14, 2016, at 5:17 AM, Steffen  wrote:
> 
> Then I wait for the Tag.
> 
> You know with me, that http2 in real live testing needs extended time for 
> testing. Happened more then once  that a crash/issue was showing up,after 3/4 
> days. So hope that 72 hours is enough.
> 
> Steffen
>  
> On Tuesday 14/06/2016 at 11:09, Stefan Eissing wrote: 
>> Steffen,
>> 
>> unfortunately not. They now contains changes that only compile with a 2.4.21 
>> httpd. 
>> 
>> -Stefan
>> 
>>> Am 14.06.2016 um 11:06 schrieb Steffen :
>>> 
>>> I rather like to test before tagging.
>>> 
>>> Can you apply these changes for my testing also to Git ?
>>> 
>>> Steffen
>>> 
>>> On Tuesday 14/06/2016 at 10:54, Stefan Eissing wrote: 
 I just backported the h2_proxy_util.c change in r1748359. It also uses the 
 back ported ap_cstr_casecmp* instead of its own copies. I tried to update 
 the win build files appropriately, but am unable to check the correctness.
 
 Gregg: please commit your changes when awake enough. Hopefully Jim can 
 keep his fingers from the tag button long enough...
 
 Cheers,
 
  Stefan
 
> Am 13.06.2016 um 22:40 schrieb William A Rowe Jr :
> 
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Gregg Smith  wrote:
> I have the to connect this module in the traditional windows build but as 
> of right now it's using h2_util.c which Bill had an objection to. See his 
> comments http://marc.info/?l=apache-httpd-dev=146543811201820=2
> 
> So to me that seems to be a -1 to mod_proxy_http2, at minimum on Windows. 
> In trunk Stefan seems to have chosen option 3 in Bill's list and that is 
> h2_proxy_util.c.
> 
> If I knew that was going to be backported I would add the rest of the 
> bits needed to use h2_proxy_util.c. If it is not going to make it, then I 
> will not commit anything and there will be no mod_proxy_http2 in 2.4.21 
> on Windows. If this gets in overnight and you tag in the morning, I may 
> not be out of bed yet due to the time difference.
> 
> That's where my concern is. Make sense?
> 
> Shouldn't be a concern. I'm mildly concerned about the single-level 
> namespace
> collisions on Unix, but because the .so object is pre-linked to its own 
> functions
> before anything is imported/exported, mod_http2.so should be using 
> h2_utils.o
> and mod_proxy_http2.so should be using h2_proxy_utils.o, even without any
> additional namespace protection. A third module trying to use the 
> functions of
> those two modules could cause headaches, but that can be addressed later.
> 
> Windows has two-level namespaces, so there is no ambiguity between symbols
> in one .so (.dll) and a second, unless you are simultaneously linking a 
> module
> to both of these modules.
> 
> I accept Stefan's proposed fix for the time being, and we can certainly 
> make
> this simpler on trunk in the future.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Bill
> 
>
 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
>

Re: h2_proxy_util.c, is this going make 2.4.21?

2016-06-14 Thread Steffen 


Then I wait for the Tag.

You know with me, that http2 in real live testing needs extended time 
for testing. Happened more then once  that a crash/issue was showing 
up,after 3/4 days. So hope that 72 hours is enough.


Steffen


On Tuesday 14/06/2016 at 11:09, Stefan Eissing  wrote:

Steffen,

unfortunately not. They now contains changes that only compile with a 
2.4.21 httpd.


-Stefan



Am 14.06.2016 um 11:06 schrieb Steffen :

I rather like to test before tagging.

Can you apply these changes for my testing also to  Git ?

Steffen

On Tuesday 14/06/2016 at 10:54, Stefan Eissing wrote:


I just backported the h2_proxy_util.c change in r1748359. It also uses 
the back ported ap_cstr_casecmp* instead of its own copies. I tried to 
update the win build files appropriately, but am unable to check the 
correctness.


Gregg: please commit your changes when awake enough. Hopefully Jim can 
keep his fingers from the tag button long enough...


Cheers,

   Stefan



Am 13.06.2016 um 22:40 schrieb William A Rowe Jr 
:


On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Gregg Smith  wrote:
I have the to connect this module in the traditional windows build but 
as of right now it's using h2_util.c which Bill had an objection to. 
See his comments 
http://marc.info/?l=apache-httpd-dev=146543811201820=2


So to me that seems to be a -1 to mod_proxy_http2, at minimum on 
Windows. In trunk Stefan seems to have chosen option 3 in Bill's list 
and that is h2_proxy_util.c.


If I knew that was going to be backported I would add the rest of the 
bits needed to use h2_proxy_util.c. If it is not going to make it, 
then I will not commit anything and there will be no mod_proxy_http2 
in 2.4.21 on Windows. If this gets in overnight and you tag in the 
morning, I may not be out of bed yet due to the time difference.


That's where my concern is. Make sense?

Shouldn't be a concern. I'm mildly concerned about the single-level 
namespace
collisions on Unix, but because the .so object is pre-linked to its 
own functions
before anything is imported/exported, mod_http2.so should be using 
h2_utils.o
and mod_proxy_http2.so should be using h2_proxy_utils.o, even without 
any
additional namespace protection. A third module trying to use the 
functions of
those two modules could cause headaches, but that can be addressed 
later.


Windows has two-level namespaces, so there is no ambiguity between 
symbols
in one .so (.dll) and a second, unless you are simultaneously linking 
a module

to both of these modules.

I accept Stefan's proposed fix for the time being, and we can 
certainly make

this simpler on trunk in the future.

Cheers,

Bill

Re: h2_proxy_util.c, is this going make 2.4.21?

2016-06-14 Thread Steffen 


I rather like to test before tagging.

Can you apply these changes for my testing also to  Git ?

Steffen


On Tuesday 14/06/2016 at 10:54, Stefan Eissing  wrote:
I just backported the h2_proxy_util.c change in r1748359. It also uses 
the back ported ap_cstr_casecmp* instead of its own copies. I tried to 
update the win build files appropriately, but am unable to check the 
correctness.


Gregg: please commit your changes when awake enough. Hopefully Jim can 
keep his fingers from the tag button long enough...


Cheers,

   Stefan



Am 13.06.2016 um 22:40 schrieb William A Rowe Jr 
:


On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Gregg Smith  wrote:
I have the to connect this module in the traditional windows build but 
as of right now it's using h2_util.c which Bill had an objection to. 
See his comments 
http://marc.info/?l=apache-httpd-dev=146543811201820=2


So to me that seems to be a -1 to mod_proxy_http2, at minimum on 
Windows. In trunk Stefan seems to have chosen option 3 in Bill's list 
and that is h2_proxy_util.c.


If I knew that was going to be backported I would add the rest of the 
bits needed to use h2_proxy_util.c. If it is not going to make it, 
then I will not commit anything and there will be no mod_proxy_http2 
in 2.4.21 on Windows. If this gets in overnight and you tag in the 
morning, I may not be out of bed yet due to the time difference.


That's where my concern is. Make sense?

Shouldn't be a concern. I'm mildly concerned about the single-level 
namespace
collisions on Unix, but because the .so object is pre-linked to its 
own functions
before anything is imported/exported, mod_http2.so should be using 
h2_utils.o
and mod_proxy_http2.so should be using h2_proxy_utils.o, even without 
any
additional namespace protection. A third module trying to use the 
functions of
those two modules could cause headaches, but that can be addressed 
later.


Windows has two-level namespaces, so there is no ambiguity between 
symbols
in one .so (.dll) and a second, unless you are simultaneously linking 
a module

to both of these modules.

I accept Stefan's proposed fix for the time being, and we can 
certainly make

this simpler on trunk in the future.

Cheers,

Bill

Re: h2_proxy_util.c, is this going make 2.4.21?

2016-06-14 Thread Stefan Eissing 
I just backported the h2_proxy_util.c change in r1748359. It also uses the back 
ported ap_cstr_casecmp* instead of its own copies. I tried to update the win 
build files appropriately, but am unable to check the correctness.

Gregg: please commit your changes when awake enough. Hopefully Jim can keep his 
fingers from the tag button long enough...

Cheers,

  Stefan

> Am 13.06.2016 um 22:40 schrieb William A Rowe Jr :
> 
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Gregg Smith  wrote:
> I have the to connect this module in the traditional windows build but as of 
> right now it's using h2_util.c which Bill had an objection to. See his 
> comments http://marc.info/?l=apache-httpd-dev=146543811201820=2
> 
> So to me that seems to be a -1 to mod_proxy_http2, at minimum on Windows. In 
> trunk Stefan seems to have chosen option 3 in Bill's list and that is 
> h2_proxy_util.c.
> 
> If I knew that was going to be backported I would add the rest of the bits 
> needed to use h2_proxy_util.c. If it is not going to make it, then I will not 
> commit anything and there will be no mod_proxy_http2 in 2.4.21 on Windows. If 
> this gets in overnight and you tag in the morning, I may not be out of bed 
> yet due to the time difference.
> 
> That's where my concern is. Make sense?
> 
> Shouldn't be a concern. I'm mildly concerned about the single-level namespace
> collisions on Unix, but because the .so object is pre-linked to its own 
> functions
> before anything is imported/exported, mod_http2.so should be using h2_utils.o
> and mod_proxy_http2.so should be using h2_proxy_utils.o, even without any
> additional namespace protection. A third module trying to use the functions of
> those two modules could cause headaches, but that can be addressed later.
> 
> Windows has two-level namespaces, so there is no ambiguity between symbols
> in one .so (.dll) and a second, unless you are simultaneously linking a module
> to both of these modules.
> 
> I accept Stefan's proposed fix for the time being, and we can certainly make
> this simpler on trunk in the future.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Bill
> 
>

Re: h2_proxy_util.c, is this going make 2.4.21?

2016-06-13 Thread William A Rowe Jr 
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Gregg Smith  wrote:

> I have the to connect this module in the traditional windows build but as
> of right now it's using h2_util.c which Bill had an objection to. See his
> comments http://marc.info/?l=apache-httpd-dev=146543811201820=2
>
> So to me that seems to be a -1 to mod_proxy_http2, at minimum on Windows.
> In trunk Stefan seems to have chosen option 3 in Bill's list and that is
> h2_proxy_util.c.
>
> If I knew that was going to be backported I would add the rest of the bits
> needed to use h2_proxy_util.c. If it is not going to make it, then I will
> not commit anything and there will be no mod_proxy_http2 in 2.4.21 on
> Windows. If this gets in overnight and you tag in the morning, I may not be
> out of bed yet due to the time difference.
>
> That's where my concern is. Make sense?


Shouldn't be a concern. I'm mildly concerned about the single-level
namespace
collisions on Unix, but because the .so object is pre-linked to its own
functions
before anything is imported/exported, mod_http2.so should be using
h2_utils.o
and mod_proxy_http2.so should be using h2_proxy_utils.o, even without any
additional namespace protection. A third module trying to use the functions
of
those two modules could cause headaches, but that can be addressed later.

Windows has two-level namespaces, so there is no ambiguity between symbols
in one .so (.dll) and a second, unless you are simultaneously linking a
module
to both of these modules.

I accept Stefan's proposed fix for the time being, and we can certainly make
this simpler on trunk in the future.

Cheers,

Bill

Re: h2_proxy_util.c, is this going make 2.4.21?

2016-06-13 Thread Stefan Eissing 
I won't be able to do this today, but can tomorrow. Otherwise anyone with time 
to merge back the change, please do. 

> Am 13.06.2016 um 20:59 schrieb Gregg Smith :
> 
> I have the to connect this module in the traditional windows build but as of 
> right now it's using h2_util.c which Bill had an objection to. See his 
> comments http://marc.info/?l=apache-httpd-dev=146543811201820=2
> 
> So to me that seems to be a -1 to mod_proxy_http2, at minimum on Windows. In 
> trunk Stefan seems to have chosen option 3 in Bill's list and that is 
> h2_proxy_util.c.
> 
> If I knew that was going to be backported I would add the rest of the bits 
> needed to use h2_proxy_util.c. If it is not going to make it, then I will not 
> commit anything and there will be no mod_proxy_http2 in 2.4.21 on Windows. If 
> this gets in overnight and you tag in the morning, I may not be out of bed 
> yet due to the time difference.
> 
> That's where my concern is. Make sense?
> 
> 
>> On 6/13/2016 11:43 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> What needs to be done?
>> 
>>> On Jun 13, 2016, at 2:20 PM, Gregg Smith  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Stefan,
>>> 
>>> Any plans to backport this before Jim tags 2.4.21 tomorrow?
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Gregg
>

Re: h2_proxy_util.c, is this going make 2.4.21?

2016-06-13 Thread Gregg Smith 
I have the to connect this module in the traditional windows build but 
as of right now it's using h2_util.c which Bill had an objection to. See 
his comments http://marc.info/?l=apache-httpd-dev=146543811201820=2


So to me that seems to be a -1 to mod_proxy_http2, at minimum on 
Windows. In trunk Stefan seems to have chosen option 3 in Bill's list 
and that is h2_proxy_util.c.


If I knew that was going to be backported I would add the rest of the 
bits needed to use h2_proxy_util.c. If it is not going to make it, then 
I will not commit anything and there will be no mod_proxy_http2 in 
2.4.21 on Windows. If this gets in overnight and you tag in the morning, 
I may not be out of bed yet due to the time difference.


That's where my concern is. Make sense?


On 6/13/2016 11:43 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:

What needs to be done?


On Jun 13, 2016, at 2:20 PM, Gregg Smith  wrote:

Hi Stefan,

Any plans to backport this before Jim tags 2.4.21 tomorrow?

Thanks,

Gregg

Re: h2_proxy_util.c, is this going make 2.4.21?

2016-06-13 Thread Jim Jagielski 
What needs to be done?

> On Jun 13, 2016, at 2:20 PM, Gregg Smith  wrote:
> 
> Hi Stefan,
> 
> Any plans to backport this before Jim tags 2.4.21 tomorrow?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Gregg
>

h2_proxy_util.c, is this going make 2.4.21?

2016-06-13 Thread Gregg Smith 

Hi Stefan,

Any plans to backport this before Jim tags 2.4.21 tomorrow?

Thanks,

Gregg