Hello,
I would be glad, if somebody can tell me, how I can distinguish between
restart and reload in a module inside hooks ap_hook_post_config,
ap_hook_pre_config and create server config.
Thank you in advance
Manfred
Hi All,
Thanks a lot for such a detailed help.It simple awesome!.Will update you
about the behavior once I do the testing.
Regards
-A
On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Chris Kukuchka [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
From: Arnab Ganguly [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It up to the OS to mark the freed areas as
I would like to thank one and all for your help. I took Ray's advise
and created a basic timing class (my code is C++) that captured elapse
time and put that around all the main calls in my code and found the
bug. It was something REALLY stupid on my part, isn't always;)
Again, thanks you all
+---+
| Bugzilla Bug ID |
| +-+
| | Status: UNC=Unconfirmed NEW=New ASS=Assigned
On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 16:36:28 +0200
Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PARSE_STRING(r,
current-left-token.value);
+current-left-value
= !!*current-left-token.value;
Why do we use !! here? Isn't this the same as !! not being there?
I don't understand that
On Mar 31, 2008, at 8:26 AM, Nick Kew wrote:
On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 16:36:28 +0200
Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PARSE_STRING(r,
current-left-token.value);
+current-left-value
= !!*current-left-token.value;
Why do we use !! here? Isn't this the same as !!
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Jim Jagielski
Gesendet: Montag, 31. März 2008 16:10
An: dev@httpd.apache.org
Betreff: Re: svn commit: r642558 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk:
CHANGES NWGNUmakefile build/nw_export.inc include/ap_expr.h
include/ap_mmn.h libhttpd.dsp server/Makefile.in
Akins, Brian wrote:
On 3/26/08 9:06 AM, Nick Kew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There seems to be a demand for dynamic per-request configuration,
as evidenced by the number of users hacking it with mod_rewrite,
and the other very limited tools available. Modern mod_rewrite
usage commonly looks like
Nick Kew wrote:
On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 08:17:01 -0400
Akins, Brian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/27/08 3:58 AM, Torsten Foertsch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
So I was going to reimplement it based on mod_wombat some
time this year.
The nice thing about lua, in addition to being lightweight, is
Paul Querna wrote:
Akins, Brian wrote:
On 3/26/08 9:06 AM, Nick Kew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There seems to be a demand for dynamic per-request configuration,
as evidenced by the number of users hacking it with mod_rewrite,
and the other very limited tools available. Modern mod_rewrite
On 3/31/08 1:46 PM, Issac Goldstand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
if possible (to
remove completely unnecessary bloating)
Lua != perl
Lua perl (size wise by an order of magnitude)
And in
addition, the learning curve to learn to use these powerful directives
is still optional
I disagree.
On 3/31/08 1:39 PM, Paul Querna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We should just do it right, and stop hacking around the central problem.
Expose the structures.
Embed Lua.
+1, but you already knew that...
Also, mod_wombat, as such, goes away if Lua is embedded. We may have a
module that sits
Issac Goldstand wrote:
Paul Querna wrote:
Akins, Brian wrote:
On 3/26/08 9:06 AM, Nick Kew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There seems to be a demand for dynamic per-request configuration,
as evidenced by the number of users hacking it with mod_rewrite,
and the other very limited tools available.
Paul Querna wrote:
Issac Goldstand wrote:
I think the right approach is to first change the internal configuration
API.
Make it a real API, not a series of callbacks with filepointers and
strings in them.
Once we have that, we can write language bindings for all of them, and
all
On Mar 31, 2008, at 10:39 AM, Paul Querna wrote:
Just read the mod_rewrite docs:
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/rewrite/rewrite_tech.html#InternalAPI
They are already exposing internals to users'.
Users want customization.
We should just do it right, and stop hacking around the central
On 03/31/2008 02:17 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: niq
Date: Mon Mar 31 05:16:58 2008
New Revision: 642971
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=642971view=rev
Log:
Flesh out ap_expr with:
* Re-usable parse trees
* Canonical string parser function (candidate)
Modified:
On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:24:50 +0200
Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't like exposing internals to a public API. If the API user
always calls it with NULL we should hide this from the API users by
using a thin wrapper.
Indeed, I think clone needs to be hidden altogether, and plan
* Nick Kew wrote:
On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:24:50 +0200
Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
#define CREATE_NODE(pool,name) do { \
-(name) = apr_palloc(pool, sizeof(*(name))); \
-(name)-parent = (name)-left = (name)-right = NULL; \
-
Nick Kew wrote:
Why do we use !! here? Isn't this the same as !! not being there?
!! is int - bool (1 or 0 value). Why - that's a good question.
Issac Goldstand wrote:
Paul Querna wrote:
Akins, Brian wrote:
On 3/26/08 9:06 AM, Nick Kew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There seems to be a demand for dynamic per-request configuration,
as evidenced by the number of users hacking it with mod_rewrite,
and the other very limited tools available.
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Issac Goldstand wrote:
Paul Querna wrote:
Akins, Brian wrote:
On 3/26/08 9:06 AM, Nick Kew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There seems to be a demand for dynamic per-request configuration,
as evidenced by the number of users hacking it with mod_rewrite,
and the other
Paul Querna wrote:
Then the existing configuration file, a new lua system, or anything
else, could be written in terms of that, rather than the current system
where each language reinvents the modules it wants to control.
I sympathize, but this doesn't reflect the addition of lua blocks...
Paul Querna wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Issac Goldstand wrote:
Paul Querna wrote:
Akins, Brian wrote:
On 3/26/08 9:06 AM, Nick Kew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There seems to be a demand for dynamic per-request configuration,
as evidenced by the number of users hacking it with
23 matches
Mail list logo
