Am 28.08.2018 um 15:54 schrieb Yann Ylavic:
On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 4:19 PM wrote:
Log:
Propose a few monitoring improvements.
Those changes look fine (and great) to me, I wanted to +1 but I'm
wondering if they really belong in 2.4.x since the output of
mod_status is changed in a way that
Hello,
On 2018-08-28 10:54, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
> As we unwind various regressions and breakage, one non-lethal but
> somewhat horrid report stands out. Eric correctly tied it to the patch
> applied for https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62590 in the
> 2.4.24 timeframe.
I'd like
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 4:21 PM Cory McIntire wrote:
>
> We’ve tested this in house and it does seem to resolve the issues from the
> previous patch. Looks good to us. :)
Thanks Cory for the tests, it has been merge in 2.4.x and will be
available in next 2.4 version.
Regards,
Yann.
Hi Rainer,
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 4:30 PM Rainer Jung wrote:
>
> Hi Yann, I will try to comment inline per patch. Yes, that's always a
> difficult decision. I think for the "?auto" part it should be easy: it
> uses a line based key-value format, so adding new keys should be fine
> for nearly
+1
> On Aug 28, 2018, at 10:30 AM, Eric Covener wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 9:54 AM Yann Ylavic wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 4:19 PM wrote:
>>>
>>> Author: rjung
>>> Date: Tue Aug 7 14:19:31 2018
>>> New Revision: 1837599
>>>
>>> URL:
As we unwind various regressions and breakage, one non-lethal but somewhat
horrid report stands out. Eric correctly tied it to the patch applied for
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62590 in the 2.4.24
timeframe.
Server Software:Apache/2.2.34
SSL/TLS Protocol:
Hi Yann, I will try to comment inline per patch. Yes, that's always a
difficult decision. I think for the "?auto" part it should be easy: it
uses a line based key-value format, so adding new keys should be fine
for nearly any parser. For the HTML based output the decision is more
difficult.
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 9:54 AM Yann Ylavic wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 4:19 PM wrote:
> >
> > Author: rjung
> > Date: Tue Aug 7 14:19:31 2018
> > New Revision: 1837599
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1837599=rev
> > Log:
> > Propose a few monitoring improvements.
> >
> >
Hi Luca,
We’ve tested this in house and it does seem to resolve the issues from the
previous patch. Looks good to us. :)
Thanks,
Cory
> On Aug 27, 2018, at 8:50 AM, Cory McIntire wrote:
>
> Hello Luca,
>
> Sorry for late reply, we’re digging into and testing this version of the
> patch
On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 4:19 PM wrote:
>
> Author: rjung
> Date: Tue Aug 7 14:19:31 2018
> New Revision: 1837599
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1837599=rev
> Log:
> Propose a few monitoring improvements.
>
> Modified:
> httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
>
> Modified:
Von: Christophe JAILLET
Gesendet: Dienstag, 21. August 2018 21:54
An: Hemant Chaudhary ; dev@httpd.apache.org;
us...@httpd.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Buffer in apache
Le 21/08/2018 à 13:50, Hemant Chaudhary a écrit :
Hi All,
I want to use buffer of 512B in apache . I am using mod_proxy_http to
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 12:17 PM Ruediger Pluem wrote:
>
> On 07/20/2018 03:07 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
> >
> > On 07/20/2018 02:49 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
> >> Ping, any objection if I commit this and add it to the backport proposal?
> >
> > Hmm. Looks like MODSSL_ERROR_BAD_GATEWAY is only used
On 07/20/2018 03:07 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
>
>
> On 07/20/2018 02:49 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
>> Ping, any objection if I commit this and add it to the backport proposal?
>
> Hmm. Looks like MODSSL_ERROR_BAD_GATEWAY is only used when the proxy connects
> to the backend.
> So the patch
13 matches
Mail list logo
