Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.0.53

måndag 07 februari 2005 06.38 skrev Justin Erenkrantz: On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 09:39:47PM +0100, Oden Eriksson wrote: I'd say +1, but I think I have no rights to vote. It seems to work just fine on several Mandrakelinux 10.0 production boxes and also on Cooker. Even if you aren't a

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.0.53

A little late, but for the record: +1 (tested on OS X/Darwin and Sol8) On Feb 5, 2005, at 7:08 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote: On Fri, 04 Feb 2005 15:00:58 -0800, Justin Erenkrantz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tarballs for 2.0.53 are available and at: http://www.apache.org/~jerenkrantz/httpd-2.0.53/ Once we

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.0.53

måndag 07 februari 2005 12.36 skrev Oden Eriksson: måndag 07 februari 2005 06.38 skrev Justin Erenkrantz: On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 09:39:47PM +0100, Oden Eriksson wrote: I'd say +1, but I think I have no rights to vote. It seems to work just fine on several Mandrakelinux 10.0 production

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.0.53

söndag 06 februari 2005 19.57 skrev Paul Querna: Justin Erenkrantz wrote: Tarballs for 2.0.53 are available and at: http://www.apache.org/~jerenkrantz/httpd-2.0.53/ Oh!, I just noticed this using the tar balls from http://www.apache.org/~jerenkrantz/0.9.6/ (same code as the bundled one)

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.0.53

On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 14:34:16 +0100, Oden Eriksson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Oh!, I just noticed this using the tar balls from http://www.apache.org/~jerenkrantz/0.9.6/ (same code as the bundled one) /bin/sh /home/oden/RPM/BUILD/apr-0.9.6/libtool --silent --mode=compile gcc -pthread -O2

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.0.53

måndag 07 februari 2005 14.42 skrev Jeff Trawick: On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 14:34:16 +0100, Oden Eriksson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Oh!, I just noticed this using the tar balls from http://www.apache.org/~jerenkrantz/0.9.6/ (same code as the bundled one) /bin/sh

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.0.53

On Mon, Feb 07, 2005 at 02:28:17PM +0100, Oden Eriksson wrote: I meant if you unpack the tar ball, the root directory name is httpd-2.0.53-rc1 and not httpd-2.0.53. Does that matter? Ah, darn. I'll fix it before I make it public. -- justin

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.0.53

måndag 07 februari 2005 16.29 skrev Justin Erenkrantz: On Mon, Feb 07, 2005 at 02:28:17PM +0100, Oden Eriksson wrote: I meant if you unpack the tar ball, the root directory name is httpd-2.0.53-rc1 and not httpd-2.0.53. Does that matter? Ah, darn. I'll fix it before I make it public. --

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.0.53

At 11:38 PM 2/6/2005, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: It looks like we've received enough +1s that I'm going to move 2.0.53 into the mirrors now. Sometime tomorrow, I will update the website and send the announcement. Question - did infra already put this to the fire under www.apache.org? Given all

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.0.53

--On Monday, February 7, 2005 11:08 AM -0600 Jess Holle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It appears that 2.0.53 does not include the LDAP socket timeout configuration patch. Is this true? If so, is there a 2.0.x-ready patch for this? We'll be building 2.0.53 binaries shortly and I'm interested in this

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.0.53

At 11:11 AM 2/7/2005, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: --On Monday, February 7, 2005 9:55 AM -0600 William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Question - did infra already put this to the fire under www.apache.org? Given all the quirks we'd seen keeping viewsvn stable, a pass on svn.apache.org would

mod_cache and Etag headers

Hi, we are trying to use mod_proxy/mod_cache as a `reverse proxy' in front of our webserver. In our configuration, we would like Apache to cache all responses from our server, but revalidate them for every new request. To do that, we are sending Etag headers and force revalidation using

LDAP socket timeout patch (was:Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.0.53)

I have a 2.0 compatible patch just about ready to go. Once I get it cleaned up, I will post it as a 2.0.53 patch in the patches directory off of the download page. Brad [EMAIL PROTECTED] Monday, February 07, 2005 10:08:29 AM It appears that 2.0.53 does not include the LDAP socket timeout

Re: LDAP socket timeout patch (was:Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.0.53)

Thank you! -- Jess Holle Brad Nicholes wrote: I have a 2.0 compatible patch just about ready to go. Once I get it cleaned up, I will post it as a 2.0.53 patch in the patches directory off of the download page. Brad [EMAIL PROTECTED] Monday, February 07,

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.0.53

William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Question - did infra already put this to the fire under www.apache.org? Given all the quirks we'd seen keeping viewsvn stable, a pass on svn.apache.org would be extra reassuring. I'm working on it. log replay is not behaving at the moment but it looks more like a

2.0.53 update was Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.0.53

--On Monday, February 7, 2005 1:50 PM -0500 Greg Ames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm working on it. log replay is not behaving at the moment but it looks more like a client problem than a server problem. I'm tempted to just switch production over but would feel better if my usual tests would

www.apache.org is running httpd-2.0.53-rc1

It's been up 2 1/2 hours and looks fine to me. Let us know if you spot a problem. btw, I would appreciate being copied directly on related emails. My apache.org mailing list posts are way behind. Thanks, Greg

Re: mod_cache and Etag headers

--On Monday, February 7, 2005 6:45 PM +0100 David Lichteblau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: we are trying to use mod_proxy/mod_cache as a `reverse proxy' in front of our webserver. In our configuration, we would like Apache to cache all responses from our server, but revalidate them for every new