Hello all,
I found a problem that mod_fcgi makes segmentation fault
when FastCGI process returns empty outout. It's caused
with missing to check end of brigade when parsing CGI
response header.
I worte a patch to fix this, and attach on this mail.
Please review.
Regards,
--
Tatsuki Sugiura
Stefan Fritsch wrote:
Hi,
mod_dav doesn't handle GET requests in a consistent way: If a repos
provider has handle_get == 1, mod_dav will handle GET requests by
itself. This means no other handler will get a chance to interpret the
file as script or SSI. On the other hand, if the repos
-Original Message-
From: Stefan Fritsch
Sent: Freitag, 29. Januar 2010 08:43
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: mod_dav inconsistent behaviour for GET requests
Hi,
mod_dav doesn't handle GET requests in a consistent way: If a repos
provider has handle_get == 1, mod_dav will
It seems my mail was not so clear.
On Friday 29 January 2010, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
The documentation
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/trunk/mod/mod_dav.html#complex
suggests using ForceType 'text/plain' to circumvent this. Apart
from the fact that this is not enough and one may
On Friday 29 January 2010, Julian Reschke wrote:
And if you really really have to, consider using the MS extension
request header Translate.
Not all DAV clients send this header. Therefore it is not an option.
-Original Message-
From: Stefan Fritsch
Sent: Freitag, 29. Januar 2010 11:26
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: mod_dav inconsistent behaviour for GET requests
It seems my mail was not so clear.
On Friday 29 January 2010, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
The
On Friday 29 January 2010, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
Thanks for clarification. I guess I understand your intension
better now. So basicly you want those providers that do not
implement GET by themselves to enforce the usage of the default
handler, correct?
Mind to sent a patch to the
On Jan 29, 2010, at 10:46 AM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
On Friday 29 January 2010, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
Thanks for clarification. I guess I understand your intension
better now. So basicly you want those providers that do not
implement GET by themselves to enforce the usage of the
