Hi,
The tarballs for 2.1.0-rc1 (tag: STRIKER_2_1_0_RC1) are now located
at the usual location:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
Note that the 2.1 tarball does _not_ come prepackaged with APR, you will
have to get the 1.0 version of apr and apr-util seperately at:
Hi,
The tarballs for 2.0.51-rc2 (tag: STRIKER_2_0_51_RC2) are now located
at the usual location:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
Please test and report any problems. Thanks!
Sander
From: Henri Gomez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2004 4:19 PM
Did there is latest AJP/MOD_PROXY stuff in this one ?
Almost latest. I tagged it three days ago. Any changes after that
are not in there. I plan on rolling rc2 at my next free interval
which will include the
From: Jess Holle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2004 5:04 PM
Sander Striker wrote:
Hi,
I'm going to start a TR cycle for both 2.0 and 2.1 monday.
Objections?
Sander
How is this going?
[Anxiously awaiting 2.0.51 tarballs...]
Something got in the way
- Original Message -
From: Joe Orton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2004 7:27 PM
Subject: Re: Time for 2.0.51 and 2.1.0
On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 06:32:12PM +0200, Sander Striker wrote:
Something got in the way. I've got a round tuit reserved
Hi,
I've tagged 2.0 as STRIKER_2_0_51_RC1. I'll roll a tarball
later on today for testing.
Sander
Hi,
I'm going to start a TR cycle for both 2.0 and 2.1 monday.
Objections?
Sander
From: Jeff Trawick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 1:33 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PROOF-OF-CONCEPT?] logging memory used by an allocator
A couple of questions come up from an application perspective:
am I leaking memory? if so, on
On Tue, 2004-06-29 at 02:27, Sander Striker wrote:
Hi,
The 2.0.50 tarballs are up and available for testing at:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
Given the number of +1s I felt comfortable to move these.
The tarballs are now up at http://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/,
so the mirrors can
Hi,
The 2.0.50 tarballs are up and available for testing at:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
Please test and cast your votes for release.
Sander
From: Andre Schild [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2004 4:53 PM
[...]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 23.06.2004 21:13:10
I just commited a fix for this.
Bill
[...]
I didi take it, and now it compiles fine under win 2000.
The server runs well under win2000 and nt 4.0 server.
Hi,
I've tagged the tree (STRIKER_2_0_50_RC1) and uploaded associated
tarballs to:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
Please test and report.
Thanks!
Sander
From: Bill Stoddard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 3:48 PM
Jeff Trawick wrote:
looks like 30-35 real fixes already in 2.0.50-dev and
another several
approved for backport, as well as a handful of enhancements
+1
Agreed. I'm willing to volunteer to do the
On Mon, 2004-06-07 at 16:15, Brian W. Fitzpatrick wrote:
On Jun 7, 2004, at 8:45 AM, Bill Stoddard wrote:
Brian W. Fitzpatrick wrote:
On Jun 6, 2004, at 10:42 PM, Geoffrey Young wrote:
FYI, Fitz did a conversion of apache-1.3, which is now located at
On Mon, 2004-05-24 at 20:52, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Sander Striker wrote:
On Mon, 2004-05-24 at 14:13, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 23, 2004, at 4:01 PM, Manoj Kasichainula wrote:
On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 12:35:13AM +0200, Sander Striker wrote:
There's only one thing for us
On Mon, 2004-05-24 at 14:13, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 23, 2004, at 4:01 PM, Manoj Kasichainula wrote:
On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 12:35:13AM +0200, Sander Striker wrote:
There's only one thing for us to decide; how to define the layout
under httpd/ in the SVN repository.
[...]
Fine here
Hi,
Now that apache-1.3 is moving to SVN, how about moving httpd-2.x
as well?
Sander
On Sat, 2004-05-22 at 17:49, Graham Leggett wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
I have just tried to build a test tree of the most recent v2.0.50-dev, and it
broke like this:
config.c:1587: `FNM_PERIOD' undeclared (first use in this function)
Attempting to build against APR 1.0?
On Fri, 2004-05-14 at 18:47, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On Wednesday, May 12, 2004 8:54 PM +0200 André Malo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to propose that the apache-1.3 tree be migrated over
to subversion.
I'm +1 on it.
+1. -- justin
From: Cliff Woolley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 8:03 PM
On Mon, 5 Apr 2004, Stas Bekman wrote:
Apparently I'm not the only one suffering from the pool cleanup abortion
at the shutdown: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23238
Should Apache2
On Fri, 2004-03-19 at 19:08, Mathihalli, Madhusudan wrote:
Hi,
I am trying to test a SSL Proxy server using sslswamp, and I'm running into
the following segmentation fault !
There appears to be some missing error checks in the APR library - here's the
backtrace:
(Apache 2.0.48 -
On Fri, 2004-03-19 at 19:41, Mathihalli, Madhusudan wrote:
Well - there might as-well be a bug in httpd (I don't deny that)
But shouldn't APR protect itself against NULL pointers in allocator_free ?
And then what? abort()? Also note that this can only happen through
pool misuse (or a severe
On Fri, 2004-03-19 at 20:01, Mathihalli, Madhusudan wrote:
[...]
Can you give a backtrace of where it does abort? And maybe the name
of the pool that is being checked (p pool-tag)? Have you stepped
through the code with gdb?
Sure.. here it is. There are 2 traces -
Let me know if you
On Sat, 2004-03-20 at 02:47, Mathihalli, Madhusudan wrote:
-Original Message-
From: William A. Rowe, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 01:30 PM 3/19/2004, Mathihalli, Madhusudan wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Sander Striker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[SNIP]
allocator
Hi,
I've put the 2.0.49 tarballs up at:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist
I'm not likely to be able to track the list actively today,
so when you have verified the tarball to be correct, please
move it to www.apache.org/dist/httpd. (including the
CHANGES_2.0 file ;) )
Hereby my +1.
And a
From: Andre Breiler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 12:41 PM
Hi,
On Thu, 18 Mar 2004, Sander Striker wrote:
I've put the 2.0.49 tarballs up at:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist
It compiles and seems to work (SunOS 5.8 sparc).
Just a minor side note
On Thu, 2004-03-18 at 13:16, Sander Striker wrote:
From: Andre Breiler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 12:41 PM
Hi,
On Thu, 18 Mar 2004, Sander Striker wrote:
I've put the 2.0.49 tarballs up at:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist
It compiles
On Wed, 2004-03-17 at 11:39, Ben Laurie wrote:
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On Tuesday, March 16, 2004 8:19 PM + Ben Laurie
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
c) You appear to be assuming daily snapshots maintained forever in your
story - if so, how do you deal with network problems and the
On Wed, 2004-03-17 at 20:16, Andre Breiler wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, 13 Mar 2004, Sander Striker wrote:
Hi,
There are 2.0.49-rc2 tarballs available at:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
I guess you didn't get around to do the -rc3 yet.
Actually, I did :)
You can find -rc3
On Tue, 2004-03-16 at 21:20, Ben Laurie wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
At 11:27 AM 3/16/2004, Ben Laurie wrote:
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On Monday, March 15, 2004 10:52 AM + Ben Laurie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is? How? Unless the committer signs (which ISTR was
On Tue, 2004-03-16 at 22:03, Joe Orton wrote:
On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 09:15:26PM +0100, Sander Striker wrote:
neon has been the most limiting dependency for a client, I am told.
Mmm, such juicy tempting FUD. Your anonymous informant should report
portability bugs to [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Tue, 2004-03-16 at 22:19, Aaron Bannert wrote:
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
On Mon, 2004-03-15 at 11:52, Ben Laurie wrote:
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On Sunday, March 14, 2004 11:18 PM -0600 William A. Rowe, Jr.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
as the GNU, ASF, and SF projects all discovered, full backups by third
parties are invaluable. What is the equivalent to
On Mon, 2004-03-15 at 12:44, Jeff Trawick wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
[...]
And in bsd/os 5.1 we have
Syntax error on line 252 of /var/www/conf/httpd.conf:
Cannot load /usr/libexec/apache/mod_expires.so into server:
/usr/libexec/apache/mod_expires.so: Undefined PLT symbol
On Mon, 2004-03-15 at 20:39, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
On Mon, 2004-03-15 at 12:02, Joshua Slive wrote:
Disadvantages of moving to subversion:
- Not as portable (?)
(Subversion clients/servers run anywhere APR does. I think that's
actually more portable than CVS, since I don't believe
On Mon, 2004-03-15 at 20:29, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
Justin Erenkrantz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
--On Sunday, March 14, 2004 11:18 PM -0600 William A. Rowe, Jr.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
as the GNU, ASF, and SF projects all discovered, full backups by third
parties are invaluable.
On Mon, 2004-03-15 at 22:02, André Malo wrote:
* Sander Striker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are 2.0.49-rc2 tarballs available at:
Please inform us of any problems you encounter. Thanks,
I'm going to backport the enableexceptionhook docs. Please put them
also into the next tag.
TB
On Mon, 2004-03-15 at 22:05, Sander Striker wrote:
On Mon, 2004-03-15 at 22:02, André Malo wrote:
* Sander Striker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are 2.0.49-rc2 tarballs available at:
Please inform us of any problems you encounter. Thanks,
I'm going to backport
On Sun, 2004-03-14 at 15:22, The Doctor wrote:
On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 01:32:53PM +0100, Sander Striker wrote:
Hi,
There are 2.0.49-rc2 tarballs available at:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
The differences with respect to the rc1 tarball are:
- BeOS specific MPM fixes
On Sun, 2004-03-14 at 16:16, The Doctor wrote:
On Sun, Mar 14, 2004 at 04:07:27PM +0100, Sander Striker wrote:
On Sun, 2004-03-14 at 15:22, The Doctor wrote:
Failure again on BSD/OS 5.1
Yeah, I wasn't expecting that to go away, since there weren't any
BSD fixes to this effect. Jeff
Hi,
There are 2.0.49-rc2 tarballs available at:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
The differences with respect to the rc1 tarball are:
- BeOS specific MPM fixes
- Netware specific rand.c fixes
- Documentation update
- Berkeley DB detection fix on FreeBSD
Furthermore the rc1 tarball was
Hi,
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/.
Subversion had a 1.0 release februari 23rd (followed by a 1.0.1 release
yesterday). Binaries are available for various platforms. Given that
it
On Sat, 2004-03-13 at 21:35, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Sander Striker wrote:
Hi,
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/.
So when?
Can we get some lead time (7-10 days from the time
On Sat, 2004-03-13 at 23:30, Guenter Knauf wrote:
Hi all,
although we had already two or three runs for doing a 2.1.0 release, it still not
happened yet.
What I really cant understand is why; nobody expects a 'stable' release, those
asking for it are pretty much aware of the fact that 2.1
On Fri, 2004-03-12 at 04:21, Bojan Smojver wrote:
Quoting Mark Rowe [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
FYI, I'll only speak for APR/Apache 2.0. 1.3 has a somewhat different
implementation.
Check out this further pool test,
[...]
apr_pool_create_ex(subp1, p, fun, NULL);
On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 18:46, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Sander Striker wrote:
Hi,
There are 2.0.49-rc1 tarballs available for testing at:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
Please report your results to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+1 for release (AIX 5.1, AIX 5.2; no time for other platforms
On Tue, 2004-03-09 at 02:13, Sander Striker wrote:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist is where the tarballs of RC 1 reside.
Please test and provide feedback.
Forgot to mention: the tagname is STRIKER_2_0_49_PRE1.
Sander
Hi,
There are 2.0.49-rc1 tarballs available for testing at:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
Please report your results to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks in advance,
Sander
On Mon, 2004-03-08 at 18:07, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On Friday, March 5, 2004 9:25 AM +0100 Sander Striker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
It's been a while since last release. I'd like to volunteer for
the RM task for 2.0.49, starting the release cycle Monday.
Thoughts?
+1
On Mon, 2004-03-08 at 22:18, Sander Striker wrote:
On Mon, 2004-03-08 at 18:07, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On Friday, March 5, 2004 9:25 AM +0100 Sander Striker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
It's been a while since last release. I'd like to volunteer for
the RM task for 2.0.49, starting
Hi,
It's been a while since last release. I'd like to volunteer for
the RM task for 2.0.49, starting the release cycle monday.
Thoughts?
Sander
From: Allan Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 7:38 PM
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
uh wrong. with /debug incremental yes is the default but you have
to pound it into the msdev's head. please fix/revert.
-# ... /dll /incremental:no /debug /machine:I386
From: William A. Rowe, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 7:43 PM
At 12:37 PM 3/5/2004, Allan Edwards wrote:
Looks like MSDEV fooness to me. I changed nothing in the project except
adding the eoc file but I can't coax MSDEV into including /incremental:no
in the dsp
On Fri, 2004-02-27 at 07:07, Sung Kim wrote:
On Thu, 2004-02-26 at 11:17, Sander Striker wrote:
From: Brian. W. Fitzpatrick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 5:53 PM
I'm in the process of testing out the cvs2svn.py converter, and the
converter found
On Wed, 2004-02-25 at 00:15, Cliff Woolley wrote:
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004, Joe Orton wrote:
I wasn't sure whether or not this EOC bucket type should go in APR-util
or httpd. Filtering gurus, what say ye? That bit looks OK to me
otherwise with a licence header added to the new file.
I say
On Sat, 2004-02-21 at 23:19, Brad Nicholes wrote:
I ran the gen-build.py script to try to understand what it is doing.
I don't see how it would fit into the NetWare build process. The
NetWare build is completely independant from anything that happens in
mainstream build process.
The idea
From: Greg Stein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2004 6:00 PM
And the notion of well, now it doesn't build on my platform is quite
suspect. The output of the process (run at buildconf time) is
build-outputs.mk. Just copy that from *anywhere* to your target platform.
We
On Fri, 2004-02-20 at 19:59, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Greg Stein wrote:
I hate to chime in here, but I must agree. Things have certainly
come a long way when the build/configure system tried to
be as LCD (lowest common denominator) as possible.
And it was a recursive make solution
On Fri, 2004-02-20 at 19:50, Brad Nicholes wrote:
I am still confused as to what this all means. What do you all mean
by Platform. I keep reading these email messages and it sounds like
Platform == Linux. NetWare doesn't use buildconf but yet we still
have to generate the files. We also
On Wed, 2004-02-18 at 15:28, Jim Jagielski wrote:
I'd like to float the idea of releasing 1.3.30 soonish.
Not only are there enough changes to warrant a release, but
also to coincide with the changeover to AL 2.0.
In response to this, how do we feel about doing 2.0.49
aswell?
Sander
On Wed, 2004-02-04 at 19:41, André Malo wrote:
Anyone already working on switching to it?
I'm starting now with the code. Please speak up, if there's already work done.
We need to take care of mod_mbox and mod_pop3 aswell.
Any takers? ;)
Sander
On Wed, 2004-02-04 at 19:41, André Malo wrote:
Anyone already working on switching to it?
I'm starting now with the code. Please speak up, if there's already work done.
AFAIK, noone is. Go for it.
Sander
On Mon, 2004-01-19 at 12:32, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
martin 2004/01/19 03:32:59
Modified:.KEYS
Log:
No need to spam innocent people
I'd think that the spammers have picked up on the s/@/ at / trick by
now. I don't really see how this fixes things for these people.
On Fri, 2004-01-09 at 04:50, Cliff Woolley wrote:
[...]
That seems to say to me that apr_psprintf is in fact threadsafe after all.
:-)
It actually depends on how apr_psprintf is called, pass it the same pool
in two concurrent threads and it might blow up. Is the apr_psprintf
function
On Fri, 2004-01-09 at 03:48, Bill Stoddard wrote:
Looks like 21287 it is not a valid defect based on your explanation.
How do I rev back my changes?
Here is how you can see the patch:
cvs diff -u -r 1.102 -r 1.103 mod_mem_cache.c
revison numbers are from cvs.apache.org.
Verify the
On Fri, 2004-01-02 at 13:32, Ben Laurie wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
nd 2004/01/01 05:26:26
Log:
update license to 2004.
Why? Unless the file changes in 2004, the copyright doesn't. And, in any
case, the earliest date applies, so it gets us nowhere.
We seem to have
On Tue, 2003-12-30 at 19:52, Ben Laurie wrote:
I realise that having the value of getpid() and time() to hand is useful
for forensic purposes, but a getpid():time():next_id++ will result in
duplicates accross even small clusters.
Ah, I see :-) does mod_unique_id handle that?
/me sees a
On Mon, 2003-12-29 at 20:57, Ben Laurie wrote:
Jeff Trawick wrote:
I propose that we should include this as a standard module.
+1 (concept)
Excellent, do I hear more?
Yes, +1 (concept). Actually, I'm in full agreement with Jeff on all
points ;).
Sander
On Fri, 2003-12-12 at 16:11, Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
I ran into a snag(1) with Digest-Auth, mod_dav and dav_svn.
I understood from Sander that this was a known subrequest issue ? But have
not found any discussion Any pointers / message-ID's for me; I just need
to get it fixed and am
On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 07:44, Stas Bekman wrote:
I now know what the problem is. It is not a problem in httpd or its filters,
but mod_perl, allocated filter struct from the pool. With many bucket brigades
there were many filter invocations during the same request, resulting in
multiple
On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 09:54, Stas Bekman wrote:
Sander Striker wrote:
On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 07:44, Stas Bekman wrote:
I now know what the problem is. It is not a problem in httpd or its filters,
but mod_perl, allocated filter struct from the pool. With many bucket brigades
there were
On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 12:29, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Cliff Woolley wrote:
On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Greg Stein wrote:
This is where process gets in the way of just doing the right thing.
Backport it for chrissakes.
amen.
The process requires getting 3 +1s. Anywhere (list, irc,
On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 13:33, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Sander Striker wrote:
The process requires getting 3 +1s. Anywhere (list, irc, phonecall, STATUS) is
okay.
No, recorded +1s are okay, this brings it down to list and STATUS.
Ofcourse to summarize on list that there was support by X
Hi,
If someone has a bit of time, we've got a bunch of backports in the
STATUS file that already have 3 +1s which can be merged.
Sander
On Sat, 2003-11-29 at 03:00, Sami Tikka wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
About re-opening 1.3 tree: I'm not sure I understand what is the big
deal. This is open source. You want to work on 1.3, go do it. Your
patches are not getting into ASF repository? Create your own. There are
other
On Sun, 2003-11-16 at 17:37, Aaron Bannert wrote:
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
On Sun, 2003-11-16 at 01:12, Glenn wrote:
Ok, so Apache2 uptake is slower than desired for some (not all) on this
list. That's only logical given the success and therefore inertia to stay
with Apache 1.3. But there are more than a few other factors mentioned in
recent threads that are
On Sun, 2003-11-16 at 15:03, Aaron Bannert wrote:
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
On Sun, 2003-11-16 at 17:15, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
-1. I'm still of the mind that _every_ release should be recreatable.
Anything we put out there is going to be at least perceived as
official,
and we should take that into account.
Every release is tagged.
That's what I'm argueing.
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://www.apache.org/~aaron/httpd-2.1.0-rc1/
Ok, I'll leave you to the RM
On Thu, 2003-11-13 at 09:06, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Aaron Bannert wrote:
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 09:55:24AM -0700, Brad Nicholes wrote:
Just to point out the obvious fact that hopefully everybody can agree with and
consider taking action on: More code review[er]s would be useful regardless
From: Swapan Gupta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 2:50 PM
Yes, my config file does have ClearModule List and AddModule directives.
Moreover, the ordering of LoadModule directives and AddModule directives is in the
same as I want it to be, ie., entries
for my
From: Jie Gao [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 9:59 PM
Same here. Reported as bug ID 24337.
This is a question for [EMAIL PROTECTED] IMO.
However, I suspect you haven't set LD_LIBRARY_PATH to include
/use/local/db40/lib (or modified /etc/ld.so.conf to do the same),
From: Brad Nicholes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 9:02 PM
What type of warning does this eliminate because for the Metrowerks
compiler on NetWare, adding the void causes a type mis-match error.
.../include/http_config.h:187: warning: function declaration isn't a
From: Brad Nicholes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 9:53 PM
So what is the best way to resolve this? Currently NetWare won't
build. It throws a compiler error in Metrowerks. I can #ifdef it based
on the compiler or is there a better way?
Revert. I'll live
From: Geoffrey Young [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 7:54 PM
probably Apache core shouldn't change the (vague) semantics of
r-filename but it can provide the access functions mentioned above
modules for 2.0 that look at r-filename could call
From: Joshua Slive [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 9:18 PM
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, Ted Rolle wrote:
It isn't at http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/, though it's highly rumoured
to be there.
It looks like it's been moved to the live site:
From: Stas Bekman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 11:07 PM
mod_rewrite and and mod_cgid need to know when Apache restarts itself, so they
won't perform the same thing more than once. Other modules need this
functionality as well (Glen suggested macros to do that).
From: Stas Bekman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 11:14 PM
My last post included a patch providing the mechanism to know when the server
starts and immediately restarts. Unfortunately it won't work for 'httpd -k
[stop|graceful|restart]' which can't reach the pool
The tarballs for 2.0.48 are ready for testing. You can find
them at:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
I'm including my explicit +1 with this mail.
Thanks,
Sander
From: Sander Striker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2003 2:44 AM
[...]
Ok, I've tagged pre3. I consider this the last tag and I'd like to
turn that into the next 2.0 release.
Due to the received feedback I had to do a pre4 tag (STRIKER_2_0_48_PRE4).
Tarballs are up
From: Sander Striker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 2:24 PM
Tell you what, if I see those merges start trickling in, I'll hold the
pre3 tag til friday. We'll put the thing on minotaur directly, and
announce to stable-testers. I'm hoping we can get enough +1s
Hi,
I've tagged the 2.1 tree with STRIKER_2_1_0_PRE3. Hopefully this is the
last tag before the first 2.1 release. Please give it a test run.
Tarballs are at:
http://www.apache.org/~striker/httpd-2.1.0-pre3/
Thanks,
Sander
From: Jeff Trawick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 2:15 PM
Sander Striker wrote:
I've re tagged the 2.0 tree with STRIKER_2_0_48_PRE2. I've
put some tarballs containing that tag up at:
There are some other fixes merged back since then, and it looks like
Hi,
I've re tagged the 2.0 tree with STRIKER_2_0_48_PRE2. I've
put some tarballs containing that tag up at:
http://www.apache.org/~striker/httpd-2.0.48-pre2/
Testers, please test this release candidate.
Thanks!
Sander
NB: I'll lay the final tag once the release candidate proves
to be
From: Jacek Prucia [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 5:24 PM
Looking at httpd release procedure, it apears that when tagging
httpd-2.0, both apr and apr-util are also tagged. I've checked some apr
files and they don't have FLOOD_1_0 tag, so I assume this doesn't
From: Jacek Prucia [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2003 2:41 AM
On Sun, 7 Sep 2003 20:06:09 -0400 (EDT)
Cliff Woolley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 7 Sep 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+if (apr_procattr_create(procattr, rp-pool) != APR_SUCCESS) {
From: Jacek Prucia [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2003 3:28 PM
Yes. This is my current release plan (please yell if it violates
something):
1. tag repo with FLOOD_1_1_RC (probably later this day),
2. prepare RC tarball and announce availability here,
3. test and
From: Cliff Woolley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2003 8:27 PM
On Mon, 8 Sep 2003, Brian Havard wrote:
Both are currently broken on OS/2 from the recent max mem free stuff. Looks
like I have to turn on AP_MPM_WANT_SET_MAX_MEM_FREE for it to compile
without error
Hi,
I tagged the trees today, as STRIKER_2_0_48_PRE1 and STRIKER_2_1_0_PRE1
respectively. I'll try and get some tarballs up for testing, but
for now, please test the tag.
Thanks,
Sander
101 - 200 of 493 matches
Mail list logo
