-Original Message-
From: Eric Covener [mailto:cove...@gmail.com]
Sent: Montag, 25. August 2014 22:05
To: Apache HTTP Server Development List
Subject: PR56729: reqtimeout bug with fast response and slow POST
I am looking at this PR which I was able to recreate:
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 10:05 PM, Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com wrote:
But it seemed a little hokey, but I didn't really understand if we
could instead treat that speculative read as some kind of reset point
and couldn't think of any other hook to tell reqtimeout to bail out.
Any
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 4:05 PM, Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com wrote:
I am looking at this PR which I was able to recreate:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56729
Whoops, I got the topic backwards. Fast post, slow response.
--
Eric Covener
cove...@gmail.com
On 08/19/2014 12:39 PM, Jan Kaluža wrote:
@@ -3206,6 +3277,10 @@ static int event_pre_config(apr_pool_t *
atomics not working as expected - add32 of
negative number);
return HTTP_INTERNAL_SERVER_ERROR;
}
+retained-idle_spawn_rate =
Anyone else seeing this with HEAD of 2.4?
# testing : trailer (pid)
# expected: '67568'
# received: 'No chunked trailer available!'
not ok 3
# Failed test 3 in t/apache/chunkinput.t at line 71
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
Anyone else seeing this with HEAD of 2.4?
# testing : trailer (pid)
# expected: '67568'
# received: 'No chunked trailer available!'
not ok 3
# Failed test 3 in t/apache/chunkinput.t at line 71
I recognize it, it's
Am 26.08.2014 um 17:02 schrieb Eric Covener:
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
Anyone else seeing this with HEAD of 2.4?
# testing : trailer (pid)
# expected: '67568'
# received: 'No chunked trailer available!'
not ok 3
# Failed test 3 in
On Aug 26, 2014, at 11:02 AM, Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com wrote:
I recognize it, it's what you get if you built the (proposed only?)
trailers thing
Looks like its been folded into 2.4-branch...
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
Looks like its been folded into 2.4-branch...
Sorry you are right. I will fix the TC
--
Eric Covener
cove...@gmail.com
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 1:18 PM, Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
Looks like its been folded into 2.4-branch...
Sorry you are right. I will fix the TC
r1620663.
- Original Message - Subject: Re: Test failure on 2.4-HEAD
From: Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com
Date: 8/26/14 11:20 am
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
On Aug 26, 2014, at 11:02 AM, Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com wrote:
I recognize it, it's what you get if you built the (proposed
Glad to see the testing efforts, it looks like this is going to fly.
Jumped over from *nix-ish platforms back into Windows for a while,
so I'll make sure the -win32-src.zip is collected with a successful
binary build against openssl 1.0.1i this aftn/eve, and sum the votes
provided there is no
- Original Message - Subject: RE: [VOTE] Release 2.2.28 as GA?
From: wr...@rowe-clan.net
Date: 8/26/14 4:07 pm
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Glad to see the testing efforts, it looks like this is going to fly.
Jumped over from *nix-ish platforms back into Windows for a while,
so I'll
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 5:01 PM, wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
I presume the 3 +1's were sufficient? There was some discussion
around the change hitting 2.2 before 2.4, so I wanted to be sure we
had the right patch on the actively maintained release branch, at
least in svn.
No issues, I just
14 matches
Mail list logo
