Geoffrey Young wrote:
hi all...
I've found it necessary to toggle single server mode when using Apache-Test,
specifically for getting Devel::Cover to work with mod_perl 1.0 nicely. so,
I'd like to add an option for switching back to single server mode on demand
for a normal run.
the problem is
+ save no-httpd one-process);
may be it's better to use _ instead of - in the option names, so one
doesn't need to quote them in the code. -no_httpd, -one_process. It's
especially nice for -one_process, since it's the same as -DONE_PROCESS.
Consistency is good :)
--
hello,
i wanted to build httpd 2.0.51 with mod_ssl and mod_deflate, using vc++ 6.0
SP6 on win2k SP4, but i get this error-message:
deflate.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol _compressBound
but only when i build the release-build, debug-build works with no problems.
i used zlib
On Tue, Sep 21, 2004 at 04:52:51PM -0700, Michael Corcoran wrote:
I've also attached a trace of the process after applying a patch that
I've been using for a while (since version 2.0.49, or something). Here
is the patch to ./srclib/apr/threadproc/unix/proc.c
I think the correct fix is to
On 22 Sep 2004 08:57:30 -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
jorton 2004/09/22 01:57:30
Modified:.Tag: APACHE_2_0_BRANCH STATUS
Log:
Find a third 2.0.51 regression THIS WEEK and win a FREE subscription
to [EMAIL PROTECTED] OFFER ENDS SOON.
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 09:51:07 +0100, Joe Orton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 21, 2004 at 04:52:51PM -0700, Michael Corcoran wrote:
I've also attached a trace of the process after applying a patch that
I've been using for a while (since version 2.0.49, or something). Here
is the patch
At 02:12 AM 9/22/2004, Marco Glatz wrote:
hello,
i wanted to build httpd 2.0.51 with mod_ssl and mod_deflate, using vc++ 6.0
SP6 on win2k SP4, but i get this error-message:
deflate.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol _compressBound
zlib 1.1.4 sources were tested, but in 1.2.x they
zlib 1.2.1 is current, it's hard to tell from your typo which
you used(?)
Try zlib 1.1.4 sources unpacked into the httpd source tree
srclib/zlib/
location.
i have used 1.1.4 and i wrote this in my first mail ;)
On Wed, Sep 22, 2004 at 06:49:03AM -0400, Jeff Trawick wrote:
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 09:51:07 +0100, Joe Orton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think anyone was aware that this problem could cause
segfaults...
true, though I saw a report of a crash in that same piece of code long
ago,
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 12:41:24 +0100, Joe Orton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Sep 22, 2004 at 06:49:03AM -0400, Jeff Trawick wrote:
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 09:51:07 +0100, Joe Orton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think anyone was aware that this problem could cause
segfaults...
At 06:23 AM 9/22/2004, Marco wrote:
zlib 1.2.1 is current, it's hard to tell from your typo which
you used(?)
Try zlib 1.1.4 sources unpacked into the httpd source tree
srclib/zlib/
location.
i have used 1.1.4 and i wrote this in my first mail ;)
You wrote 1.4.1 shrug. Anyways, we have
The binaries for 2.0.51 have been removed from the www.apache.org/dist/
site, you can still find them in archive.apache.org/dist/.
However, due to CAN-2004-0811, I would strongly discourage you from
using these binaries.
I believe it's a disservice to repackage with the patch, since it's
Perhaps the fix to bug #24801 I recently provided could be included as
well...
--
Jess Holle
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
The binaries for 2.0.51 have been removed from the www.apache.org/dist/
site, you can still find them in archive.apache.org/dist/.
However, due to CAN-2004-0811, I would
Can we quickly identify what else was broken to roll out 2.0.52
in the next day or two? I presume this too was 2.0.51 specific?
Bill
jorton 2004/09/22 01:57:30
Modified:.Tag: APACHE_2_0_BRANCH STATUS
Log:
Find a third 2.0.51 regression THIS WEEK and win a FREE
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 08:39:04 -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can we quickly identify what else was broken to roll out 2.0.52
in the next day or two? I presume this too was 2.0.51 specific?
it is my understanding that the mod_mem_cache double-free was a
regression
At 08:55 AM 9/22/2004, you wrote:
Perhaps the fix to bug #24801 I recently provided could be included as well...
This patch?
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/showattachment.cgi?attach_id=12817
I'm not as familiar with this cache code, Graham could you look at this?
In any case, it's committed
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 11:20:02 -0400, Jeff Trawick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 08:39:04 -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can we quickly identify what else was broken to roll out 2.0.52
in the next day or two? I presume this too was 2.0.51 specific?
it
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
At 08:55 AM 9/22/2004, you wrote:
Perhaps the fix to bug #24801 I recently provided could be included as well...
This patch?
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/showattachment.cgi?attach_id=12817
Yep.
I'm not as familiar with this cache
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
This patch?
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/showattachment.cgi?attach_id=12817
I'm not as familiar with this cache code, Graham could you look at this?
This is already committed to v2.1.0-dev, and is awaiting votes:
*) Fix a segfault in the LDAP cache purge.
Graham Leggett wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
This patch?
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/showattachment.cgi?attach_id=12817
I'm not as familiar with this cache code, Graham could you look at this?
This is already committed to v2.1.0-dev, and is awaiting votes:
*) Fix a segfault in the
On Sat, 18 Sep 2004, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
But ap_add_output_filters_by_type() explicitly does nothing for a
proxied request. Anyone know why? AddOutputFilterByType DEFLATE
text/plain text/html seems to work as expected here for a forward proxy
with this applied: maybe I'm missing
On Wed, Sep 22, 2004 at 05:48:58PM +0200, Graham Leggett wrote:
This is already committed to v2.1.0-dev, and is awaiting votes:
*) Fix a segfault in the LDAP cache purge.
modules/ldap/util_ldap_cache_mgr.c: 1.9
+1: minfrin
0: bnicholes - backporting
The 2.0 filter chain is a great tool: for me it's _the_ major innovation
that turns httpd-2.0 from a (mere) webserver to a powerful applications
platform. But extensive working with it highlights weaknesses.
The introduction of AddOutputFilterByType sought to address one of the
weaknesses, but
--On Wednesday, September 22, 2004 5:01 PM +0100 Nick Kew [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I've said it before and I'll say it again: AddOutputFilterByType is
fundamentally unsatisfactory. This confusion is an effect, not cause.
Suffice to say, I disagree.
* Configuration is inconsistent with other
Joe Orton wrote:
I can't believe I have to write more than one e-mail about this --
please go and *read* what you committed:
I did. Very carefully.
It would seem I looked at the original patch proposed, as well as the
patch v1.7. On investigation, the patch I was sent via email and got
committed
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On Wednesday, September 22, 2004 5:01 PM +0100 Nick Kew [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I've said it before and I'll say it again: AddOutputFilterByType is
fundamentally unsatisfactory. This confusion is an effect, not cause.
Suffice to say, I
--On Wednesday, September 22, 2004 6:17 PM +0100 Nick Kew
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems to me heavily counterintuitive that mixing ByType directives
with anything else means that the ByType filters *always* come last.
And that Remove won't affect them, but will affect others.
I think we
At 08:29 AM 9/22/2004, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
I'm prepared to reroll the Win32 installers this week for 2.0.52 - the
only question is, what other regressions did 2.0.51 introduce? May as
well fix all the newly introduced bugs and roll out 2.0.52 in the next
day or two.
Based on the
--On Wednesday, September 22, 2004 5:13 PM +0100 Nick Kew
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
*** A few issues with util_filter in 2.0:
ap_filter_type
==
Making this an enum and then using values like AP_FTYPE_[anything] + 5
(as is done in, for example, mod_ssl) makes no sense. An int with
a
Bill Stoddard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Joe Schaefer wrote:
[...]
ie 1 server w/ 5 threads. The closer_thread's queue/pollset size
are capped at 100 with this config.
Running ab -n 1 -c $concurrency http://localhost/
concurency requests/sec
unpatched
Joe Schaefer wrote:
Bill Stoddard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Joe Schaefer wrote:
[...]
ie 1 server w/ 5 threads. The closer_thread's queue/pollset size
are capped at 100 with this config.
Running ab -n 1 -c $concurrency http://localhost/
concurency requests/sec
On Wed, 2004-09-22 at 15:00 -0400, Bill Stoddard wrote:
Is there any interest in this patch? Eventually it might
even be nice to extend the concept to keepalives, but I suppose
that would mean introducing some state management into
ap_process_connection.
FWIW, I am definitely
APACHE 1.3 STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2004/09/22 13:01:17 $]
Release:
1.3.32-dev: In development. Jim proposes a release top of Sept.
1.3.31: Tagged May 7, 2004. Announced May 11, 2004.
1.3.30: Tagged April 9, 2004. Not
APACHE 2.0 STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2004/09/22 18:19:35 $]
Release:
2.0.52 : in development
2.0.51 : released September 15, 2004 as GA.
2.0.50 : released June 30, 2004 as GA.
2.0.49 : released March 19, 2004 as
APACHE 2.1 STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2004/09/03 02:47:19 $]
Release [NOTE that only Alpha/Beta releases occur in 2.1 development]:
2.1.0 : in development
Please consult the following STATUS files for information
on related
35 matches
Mail list logo
