On Oct 10, 2011, at 3:02 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
Following a chat with a fellow developer, the subject of my
donating mod_proxy_html to ASF arose again. This would
(presumably) sit best as an HTTPD subproject in the manner
of mod_ftp, mod_fcgid, etc, so that it doesn't pull in
libxml2 as a
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 12:28:46AM +, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 12:17 PM, Noirin Shirley noi...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Dan Poirier poir...@pobox.com wrote:
How about Apache Web Server? Httpd is just the name of one of the
files, and
On Feb 10, 2010, at 11:34 PM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Aaron Bannert
Sent: Donnerstag, 11. Februar 2010 00:04
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: mod_proxy_http ignores errors from
ap_pass_brigade(r-output_filters)
mod_proxy_http appears to be ignoring
mod_proxy_http appears to be ignoring errors returned from ap_pass_brigade
(when passing down the output_filter stack). This is a problem for any
output filter that has a fatal error and wishes to signal that error
to the client (eg. HTTP_INTERNAL_SERVER_ERROR). I'm not familiar enough
with the
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 02:53:14PM -0700, Shankar Unni wrote:
Paul Querna wrote:
- High Performance Event System Calls (KQueue, Event Ports, EPoll, I/O
Completion Ports).
This is a tricky area. You definitely don't want to tie yourself to a
small subset of OSes. The real magic trick,
Apache shouldn't be prematurely disconnecting sockets in the middle
of a response unless there is a serious problem (Eg. the Apache
child process is crashing). Could you describe how to reproduce this?
As for the patch, could you make this configurable with a command-line
option? That way the
On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 02:10:19PM -0800, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
But do we really want to start by calling it 3.0? How about if we
work off of a few code names first? Say, for example, amsterdam.
The reason is because there will be some overlap between ideas of
how to do certain things,
On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 07:08:32PM +, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 01:57:27PM -0500, Brian Akins wrote:
Would be nice if we could do HTTP over unix domain sockets, for example.
No need for full TCP stack just to pass things back and forth between
Apache and
Hi Greg,
According to your logs, each of the responses are 206 (Partial Content)
codes, which means the client requested only a range of the resource,
not the entire resource (see
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html#sec10.2.7
for details).
It is unclear from your message how
If you don't care about portability, pthread_rwlocks stored in shmem
should work fine. The reason we didn't implement a cross-process
rwlock in APR is because we couldn't guarantee a proper implementation
(at the time) on all supported platforms.
-aaron
On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 03:44:16PM +,
On Mon, Nov 20, 2006 at 09:51:44PM +, Andy Armstrong wrote:
On 13 Nov 2006, at 17:09, Andy Armstrong wrote:
Toni - this isn't really the right list for your question - this
list is concerned with the development of Apache itself.
The majority of the PHP code is not Apache specific and
Makes sense, +1 in concept.
-a
On Oct 28, 2005, at 6:40 AM, Brian Akins wrote:
Can we get a vote on this?
--- mod_proxy_http.c.orig 2005-09-26 11:43:45.893872108 -0400
+++ mod_proxy_http.c2005-09-26 12:06:48.390005516 -0400
@@ -641,7 +641,7 @@
I've been trying to speed up the release cycles for years, but
it's only gotten slower with all the red tape.
The slow release cycles are just another symptom of a broken process,
they are not the cause.
-aaron
On Aug 9, 2005, at 7:00 AM, Paul Querna wrote:
Aaron Bannert wrote:
*** Look
?
-aaron
On Aug 9, 2005, at 6:11 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Aug 9, 2005, at 1:55 AM, Aaron Bannert wrote:
I can't believe you guys are still debating the merits of RTC over
CTR
after all this time. RTC killed the momentum in this project a
long time
ago.
The RTC experiment was tried
No, 2.0 was a moving target because there was lots of active
development and things were getting rapidly fixed and rolled into
tarballs for our beta testers to pound on. There were easily 3 times
as many developers working on 2.0 than there are now.
Moving Target Stagnation
Bill's changes were
On Aug 9, 2005, at 7:40 AM, Nick Kew wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
I think that RTC has a place, but too often RTC is used as a club
to slow down development. Small changes that could easily
be made once the code has been committed instead result in
cycles of Wouldn't it be best to do this?
before APR is fixed?
-aaron
On Aug 8, 2005, at 11:31 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Aug 8, 2005, at 10:55 PM, Aaron Bannert wrote:
I can't believe you guys are still debating the merits of RTC over
CTR
after all this time. RTC killed the momentum in this project a
long time
ago
, 2005, at 9:47 AM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On August 9, 2005 8:17:37 AM -0700 Aaron Bannert
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been trying to speed up the release cycles for years, but
it's only gotten slower with all the red tape.
Where have you been when we've done releases in the last
I can't believe you guys are still debating the merits of RTC over CTR
after all this time. RTC killed the momentum in this project a long time
ago.
* Quality and stability are emergent properties, not processes:
Making releases is a natural step in the bug-fixing cycle. However,
the STATUS
I don't see this backport in 1.3, but I did provide a patch at one
point.
I'll update my patch and repost along with the magic number bumps
that were talked about a month or so ago.
-aaron, catching up on really old messages
On Apr 25, 2005, at 11:45 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author:
If there's no objection, shall I just go ahead and commit this?
-aaron
On Mar 24, 2005, at 4:38 PM, Aaron Bannert wrote:
I've attached a patch against the trunk of Apache 1.3 that backports
support for the AllowEncodedSlashes directive. It should behave
identically to the way it works in 2.0
On Mar 29, 2005, at 8:47 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Since we're extending core_dir_config, we should document the
change in core_dir_config
Should I elaborate more in my core_dir_config from what I already have?
Index: src/include/http_core.h
I've attached a patch against the trunk of Apache 1.3 that backports
support for the AllowEncodedSlashes directive. It should behave
identically to the way it works in 2.0. By default Apache will disallow
any request that includes a %-encoded slash ('/') character (which
is '%2F'), but by enabling
On Mar 4, 2005, at 12:08 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Any comments on these two separate proposals?
b) tweak worker MPM to automatically bump the value of MaxSpareThreads
to at least 15% of MaxClients, with a warning written to the error log
I like this best, because is requires no action on the user's
On Feb 28, 2005, at 1:17 PM, Paul A. Houle wrote:
Honestly, I don't see a huge advantage in going to worker. On Linux
performance is about the same as prefork, although I haven't done
benchmarking on Solaris.
Under low-load conditions prefork often out-performs worker. Under
high-concurrency
On Nov 20, 2004, at 12:11 PM, Paul Querna wrote:
No, I do not want to make it forbidden. Rather, I would like a set
date where we do not provide _any_ implied support as the HTTPd
project.
We don't provide any implied support anyway. Sure, we'd like to release
perfect software, but we make no
On Nov 20, 2004, at 10:32 AM, Paul Querna wrote:
I would like to have a semi-official policy on how long we will
provide security backports for 2.0 releases.
I suggest a value between 6 and 12 months.
Many distrobutions will provide their own security updates anyways, so
this would be a service
On May 8, 2004, at 4:05 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
I don't consider us a closely held ivory-tower QA and I would
say that if anyone knows of a talented pool of users would would
like to test RCs, then we should have a mechanism to use them.
That was the intent for the current/stable-testers list,
Why is it bad if people download the RC version and
test it? Frankly, I really don't mind if slashdot or anyone
else broadcasts that we have an RC tarball available.
If anything it's a good thing. We don't make any guarantees
about our code anyway, so whether or not we call it a GA
release is just
we do that
we Announce it :)
Aaron Bannert wrote:
Why is it bad if people download the RC version and
test it? Frankly, I really don't mind if slashdot or anyone
else broadcasts that we have an RC tarball available.
If anything it's a good thing. We don't make any guarantees
about our code anyway, so
FWIW, we're currently only using half of our allocated bandwidth.
If RC distributions become a bandwidth problem, we can think
about mirroring then (wouldn't that be a great problem to have
though?)
-aaron
On May 7, 2004, at 7:05 PM, André Malo wrote:
* Aaron Bannert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
You shouldn't have to run buildconf. Start from a clean tarball again
and
just run ./configure with your args and then make.
-aaron
On Apr 4, 2004, at 9:41 PM, Navneetha wrote:
am am new to apache flood.i have downloaded the copy of flood .after
successful download i am able to successfully
On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 09:13:45AM +0100, Philippe Marzouk wrote:
On Sun, Mar 14, 2004 at 05:27:16PM -0800, Aaron Bannert wrote:
This sounds reasonable to me, did it ever get committed?
I imagine you asked the flood developers but I just did a cvs diff and
this patch was not committed
On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 09:52:49PM +0100, Sander Striker wrote:
Can we please move this discussion to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A lot of the points discussed aren't about technical problems of httpd
moving over, but overall topics concerning our setup. Most of the
concerns that have come up are
On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 02:04:09PM +0100, Sander Striker wrote:
I hereby would like to propose that we move the HTTP Server project
codebase to the Subversion repository at:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/.
-1
This will, at least for now, raise the bar to entry for contributors.
-aaron
Ok, after wading through the code for awhile I have a working theory:
1) Parent creats a child
2) Parent gets graceful-restart signal
3) Parent returns from ap_run_mpm, pconf is cleared, cross-process lock file
is closed and removed.
4) Child finally gets scheduled to run the
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 07:53:03AM +, Joe Orton wrote:
There was an httpd-test issue causing segfaults in t/http11/chunked.t
(fixed yesterday) - was that it or was there something else?
That wasn't it, it was a more general problem getting the test suite
to run (and get all its dependencies
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 06:02:03PM +0100, Sander Striker wrote:
There are 2.0.49-rc1 tarballs available for testing...
+1
Looks good over here (though I had trouble running the testsuite on x86_64).
FWIW, x86_64/Linux on my 1.2Ghz Opteron with NPTL enabled runs worker
about 40% faster than
On Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 04:04:38PM +, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
There were other changes co-incidental to that, like going to 12Gb
of RAM, which certainly helped, so it's hard to narrow it down too
much.
Ok with 18,000 or so child processes (all in the run queue) what does
your load look
On Tue, Jan 13, 2004 at 02:04:06PM +, Ivan Ristic wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
I'd like to get some sort of feedback concerning the idea
of having ServerTokens not only adjust what Apache
sends in the Server header, but also allow the directive
to fully set that info.
For example:
Could someone please remind me why --with-capath is mandatory when
--enable-ssl is used? The default is only useful if you actually
use --with-ssl=some/path. I have a patch that changes the default to
$sysconfdir/certs, but in the long run I think this should be something
configured through the
[we really should move this to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list]
On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 11:53:53AM +, Ben Laurie wrote:
This was exactly the conversation we were having at the hackathon. As
always, Windows was the problem, but I thought Bill had it licked?
Well, there are two things we have to
On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 01:50:46PM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
But the 2.0 architecture is entirely different. We need a poll but it's not entirely
obvious where to put one...
One suggestion raised in a poll bucket: when a connection level filter cannot
read anything more, it passed
On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 08:39:27AM -0500, Brian Akins wrote:
I wonder if this
binary would run on an older processor (running a modern version of linux).
AFAIK, yes. It's standard x86 assembly.
All: Please correct me if I am wrong. I'm sure you will ;)
I'm no x86 asm expert, so maybe
On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 01:42:54PM +0100, Sander Striker wrote:
It's a public recorded thing, so I'd say: that surely is more than
sufficient. I was getting at the fact that phonecalls or irc sessions
aren't logged, so there is no way to know there was approval without it
being summarized
On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 06:29:28PM -0500, Glenn wrote:
On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 03:18:44PM -0800, Stas Bekman wrote:
Are you saying that if I POST N MBytes of data to the server and just have
the server send it back to me, it won't grow by that N MBytes of memory for
the duration of that
On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 03:24:15PM -0500, Brian Akins wrote:
I was testing on x86 Linux which appears to do the apr_atomics in assembly.
Does it use this atomics implementation by default? I wonder if this
binary would run on an older processor (running a modern version of linux).
-aaron
On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 11:38:25PM -0800, MATHIHALLI,MADHUSUDAN (HP-Cupertino,ex1)
wrote:
A first guess is that I'm using SysV semaphores, and a semlock can bring
down the entire httpd to crawl. I'm re-compiling using pthread mutexes
whenever possible.
Depending on the implementation in your
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 08:40:05AM -0500, Brian Akins wrote:
Backported from 2.1. Stable for me in various loads.
Cool! What OS/arch are you using? Also, any idea how well it performs
compared to before the patch?
-aaron
On Wed, Nov 26, 2003 at 03:51:23PM -0500, Christopher Jastram wrote:
My boss found subversion+webdav, and wants it implemented for use with
Adobe FrameMaker. So, I need dav_lock (without it, framemaker can load
from dav, but cannot checkin or checkout).
Cool!
I checked nagoya, there
On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 12:54:05AM -0500, Robert La Ferla wrote:
I have no problem with running release candidates and contributing. I
have contributed in the past by the way... In fact, I wouldn't object
to trying nightly or weekly builds. The problem is that I don't see
those as easily
On Sun, Nov 23, 2003 at 10:13:09PM -0500, Robert La Ferla wrote:
What testing gets performed prior to an official httpd 2.x release? I
think whatever test suite is used, needs some updating to include
configurations that utilize more features like user tracking, caching
and multi-views.
i reserve my own shared memory
and the child process can access to this memory?
-Mensaje original-
De: Aaron Bannert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Enviado el: sábado, 22 de noviembre de 2003 7:41
Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Asunto: Re: MaxClients as shared memory
On Sat, Nov 22, 2003
!?
From: Aaron Bannert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Fwd: request scheduling ?
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 22:42:29 -0800
On Sat, Nov 22, 2003 at 01:23:24AM +, Haskell Curry wrote:
How does the apache do the request scheduling !?
does
On Sat, Nov 22, 2003 at 01:56:11AM +0100, David Herrero wrote:
Hello, i need to do the global variable as shared memory which
can be modificated in executing time by child process. Well, i want to
know what is the better way, including MaxClients in the Scoreboard or
created a shared
On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 04:09:12PM -0800, Tyler Riddle wrote:
I made a simple modification to mod_autoindex that
allows one to specify a style sheet to be used for the
generated page in the server config file. This was
done with a new configuration item IndexStyleSheet.
This item specifies a
On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 01:29:50AM +0100, David Herrero wrote:
I need to implement a control module that creates a child process to
receive request to modify a global variable of Apache, if it creates a
child that has a copy of this variable, the other process doesn't view
the change. Can i
On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 03:54:59PM -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote:
I'm also curious about what a 1.4/1.5 would do that the current 1.3
does not which would provide a seamless upgrade. Are you talking
API or what? As someone who's preformed numerous such migrations,
the actual mechanics of doing so
I've updated the tools/release.sh script in the httpd-dist CVS
repository to make it easier for anyone to create HTTPD tarballs.
Before it was necessary for a tag to exist before a tarball could
be created. This made it very difficult to release
experimental/developmental tarballs to a set of
I've made some tarballs of the httpd-2.1 tree. I just pulled HEAD of
both httpd and apr (as of about an hour ago, just before greg's pollset
changes). They're here:
http://www.apache.org/~aaron/httpd-2.1.0-rc1/
This seems to work fine on my Mac OS X (10.3 Panther) box, my linux
2.4 x86 box, and
On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 02:34:47PM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On Sunday, November 16, 2003 5:20 PM -0400 Marc G. Fournier
'k, maybe expand the comment in the INSTALL file to address this?
Well, we've asked for confirmation of FreeBSD threading 'working' on the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -
On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 05:20:33PM -0800, Sander Striker wrote:
On Sun, 2003-11-16 at 15:36, Aaron Bannert wrote:
I've made some tarballs of the httpd-2.1 tree. I just pulled HEAD of
both httpd and apr (as of about an hour ago, just before greg's pollset
changes). They're here:
http
On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 09:43:03PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Yup, this is what I tend to see ...
One question, what does 'ps auxwl' show, primarily the WCHAN column?
I don't have access to the machine right now, but I can check later.
-aaron
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 05:51:46PM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
Creating roles like this is just as bad as having chunks of httpd owned
by one particular developer. (See below)
I don't think you understand the role of 'patch manager.' On the projects
I'm involved with, that person's
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 09:55:24AM -0700, Brad Nicholes wrote:
One question: Have we set the barrier too high? This was discussed at
length last year when the 2_0_BRANCH was created and I think that it is
worth reviewing. My personal feeling is that the barrier may be doing
more to discourage
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 05:14:35PM -0800, Stas Bekman wrote:
==
1) Bugs
searching for NEW and REOPENED bugs in httpd-2.0 returns: 420 entries
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 05:50:46PM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On Monday, November 10, 2003 17:14:35 -0800 Stas Bekman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I believe Sander's suggested that we start a patch manager role (discussion
at AC Hackathon!). A few other projects I'm involved with do
On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 02:04:31AM +0100, Erik Abele wrote:
I'd be very in favour of exploring other forms of bug-tracking. For
example
we'll have a full replication of BugZilla in Jira (/me hides) in the
near future
here on ASF hardware (see http://nagoya.apache.org/jira/ for a preview).
On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 02:17:01AM +0100, Erik Abele wrote:
My main requirement is that the bug tracking system be fully-accessible
through email. Having a full web interface is great, but not at the
expense of usable offline replies to bug reports.
Okay, I can understand that.
(Do either
On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 07:44:57PM +0100, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
gdb backtrace;
#0 0x080872ab in server_main_loop (remaining_children_to_start=Cannot
access memory at address 0x9
) at worker.c:1579
1579ap_wait_or_timeout(exitwhy, status, pid, pconf);
(gdb) bt full
#0
On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 07:44:57PM +0100, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
One of our servers is getting truly hammered today (5,000 simultaneous
clients is not unusual right now), so I've been tinkering with worker
instead of prefork. It's not doing nice things for me :(
The master
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 03:06:26PM -0500, Wood, Bryan wrote:
Has anyone used this on the arm platform?
Used what?
-aaron
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 06:47:16PM +0200, Graham Leggett wrote:
Is there no way that some cleanup process (whether it involves deleting
a file, or talking to the kernel, doesn't matter) can be done before an
attempt is made to create the shared memory segment?
The problem with doing that is
On Tuesday, September 9, 2003, at 04:18 PM, Jacek Prucia wrote:
I have just tagged the tree with FLOOD_1_1_RC1. Release tarballs (made
with
apr and apr-util HEAD) are available for testing here:
http://cvs.apache.org/~jacekp/release/
RC1 builds cleanly on my Gentoo box (with openssl and
On Tuesday, September 9, 2003, at 04:18 PM, Jacek Prucia wrote:
I would like to ask other RM's to take a closer look at RC1 tarballs.
I might
goofed something up and have absolutelly no idea about it :)
The tarball builds and runs great on Darwin 6.6 (Mac OS X 10.2.6), good
work!
Here's my +1
I think I wrote that stuff, and the first time you run make it
will complain about a missing .deps file, but once that file is
built you won't get the complaints any longer. I just didn't
take the time to figure out how to do it in a way that didn't
complain about the missing file.
-aaron
On
If making a release wasn't so complicated, I'd do one right now.
Where can one find the most recently updated RM instructions these days?
-aaron
On Friday, August 22, 2003, at 11:07 PM, Paul Querna wrote:
An Alpha Type Release from HEAD has been discussed Several times in
the past
months.
You've simply exhausted your systemwide (or soft user limits) for
that resource. Find out what type of lock you're using and increase
the limit.
-aaron
On Friday, August 22, 2003, at 05:04 AM, Pablo Yaggi wrote:
Hi,
I notice the semaphore bug last night, is anybody working on it ? I
saw is
Can you tell us more about the operating systems and the hardware
(drivers,
network cards, etc)?
-aaron
On Friday, August 22, 2003, at 04:59 PM, Jim Whitehead wrote:
Teng Xu, a graduate student working with me, has been developing a
WebDAV
performance testing client. Some of the results he
On Wednesday, August 6, 2003, at 10:33 AM, Austin Gonyou wrote:
If I have a Linux server using httpd 1.3 and has 1GB ram and has 1012
httpd processes. When I look at that process's ram stats, I have a
vmSize of say 7032KB, vmRSS of 2056KB, and vmEXE of 2072KB.
Is the size I'm most concerned
On Monday, August 11, 2003, at 04:26 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On Sunday, August 10, 2003 23:24:04 +0200 Jacek Prucia
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This probably belongs in contrib/patches. It is a quick'n'dirty hack I
did few days ago, to simulate applet making network connection.
Basically it
On Thursday, July 24, 2003, at 01:31 PM, Astrid Keßler wrote:
It would be a big help to our users if config.nice was installed by a
make
install.
This is a really good idea. +1
I like this too. +1
Where should it be installed? $prefix/lib maybe?
-aaron
On Sunday, June 29, 2003, at 06:18 PM, Jacek Prucia wrote:
Please have another look at:
http://cvs.apache.org/~jacekp/manual/
This is actually what I'm going to commit tommorow. It has bugs, empty
places,
but at least mentions every element/attribute available (at least I
hope so).
Looks like
On Friday, June 27, 2003, at 11:08 AM, Ken Ashcraft wrote:
Have race conditions and deadlock been a problem in the past? How
likely is it that there are race condition and deadlock bugs hiding in
the current source?
Race Conditions and Deadlocks are an issue both in the server and
in modules.
On Tuesday, June 24, 2003, at 12:35 PM, Jeremy Brown wrote:
[...]
generators running FreeBSD 5.1
You might try other operating systems. I don't know how well FreeBSD
compares, but I have had good luck on both Solaris (x86) and Linux 2.4.
Are there any tips to get more throughput on flood?
Depends
Anyone can RM, and they don't even have to announce it before
they have a tarball made.
-aaron
On Wednesday, June 25, 2003, at 03:40 PM, Sander Striker wrote:
I'm volunteering to be RM for 2.0.47. When noone objects
I'm going to try to get out a stable tag withing the next two
weeks. My aim
On Thursday, May 29, 2003, at 12:30 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Modified:docs/manual Tag: APACHE_2_0_BRANCH bind.html.en
bind.html.ja.jis bind.html.ko.euc-kr
cgi_path.html.en cgi_path.html.ja.jis
On Thursday, March 27, 2003, at 01:36 AM, Sander Striker wrote:
People, why, oh why, do we need to muck with the Server header? Who
cares? Attacks will
be run regardless of Server headers (and if not, they will as soon as
we start removing them).
So, in the end, what good does it do?
I
On Thursday, March 27, 2003, at 12:55 PM, Ian Holsman wrote:
1. does anyone know of a tool which can replay http traffic caught via
tcpdump, and possibly
change the hostname/ip# of the host.
tcptrace (www.tcptrace.org I think) can take tcpdump output
and produce a file for each direction of
On Thursday, March 20, 2003, at 01:50 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
wrowe 2003/03/20 13:50:41
Modified:.CHANGES
modules/loggers mod_log_config.c
modules/mappers mod_rewrite.c
server log.c mpm_common.c
On Thursday, March 13, 2003, at 01:46 AM, Jacek Prucia wrote:
* Write robust tool (using tethereal perhaps) to take network
dumps
and convert them to flood's XML format.
Status: Justin volunteers. Aaron had a script somewhere that
is
a start.
Wouldn't it be
On Wednesday, March 12, 2003, at 12:51 PM, Oden Eriksson wrote:
Anyway..., despite this enormous disregard or what it is called,
mandrake
Linux will be the first distribution shipping apache2 (my packaging),
_plus_
a whole bunch of other server like stuff I have packed.
Um, hasn't RH8.0 been
On Thursday, February 27, 2003, at 07:56 AM, Greg Ames wrote:
Most of us have committed bug fixes with the best of intentions which
were not quite complete or had unintended side effects. I certainly
have - the deferred write pool stuff in core_output_filter comes to
mind. Letting the fixes
On Wednesday, February 19, 2003, at 11:32 AM, Cliff Woolley wrote:
On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, Dietz, Phil E. wrote:
For 2.1 and beyond, I'd rather see something more generic. Like a
mod_authn_odbc or a mod_authn_soap.
Ironic, since I was just about to say I'm not so keen on adding more
modules
Being enabled or disable by default isn't solely based on
begin stable. I personally don't think mod_deflate should
be enabled by default, especially given its track record
of browser incompatibility/bugs.
-aaron
On Sunday, February 16, 2003, at 06:47 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
jerenkrantz
On Monday, February 17, 2003, at 06:45 AM, Joshua Slive wrote:
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Aaron Bannert wrote:
Being enabled or disable by default isn't solely based on
begin stable. I personally don't think mod_deflate should
be enabled by default, especially given its track record
of browser
On Monday, February 17, 2003, at 07:30 AM, Joshua Slive wrote:
The current build/install system will add a LoadModule line for
each DSO that it installs.
But it won't actually activate the filter, will it?
Does mod_deflate need something special to be enabled,
other than the LoadModule
On Wednesday, February 12, 2003, at 01:08 PM, Min Xu wrote:
We will soon have two new 8P Sun servers equipped with
Gigabit ethernet coming to our lab. With that, I should be able to
experiment with separate machines.
I'd be very interested in seeing updated results from a multi-machine
Sometimes it's useful to have comments in the configure cruft, but yeah
the dnl's should stay.
-aaron
On Tuesday, February 11, 2003, at 08:51 AM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On Tuesday, February 11, 2003 3:36 PM + [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
jorton 2003/02/11 07:36:56
Modified:.
A couple questions and a couple observations:
1) How many network cards are in the server? (How many unique
interrupt handlers for the network?)
2) How much context switching was going on, and how impacted
were the mutexes (see mpstat)?
3) Was the workload uniformly distributed across the
1 - 100 of 671 matches
Mail list logo
