On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 6:23 AM, Steffen i...@apachelounge.com wrote:
That looks better and so far I can see it is the behavior as with 2.3.7.
Keep it running at AL. When I see some strange, I shall report.
That is good news. I hope to tag and roll mod_fcgid 2.3.9 later in the day
unless I
Helo,
on my linux box, latest trunk, when I touch/modify an include file (touch
server/*.h modules/*/*.h), the concerned .c do not recompile with make
(exports and httpd binary are rebuilt, but no .c recompiled).
I first though it was my autotools broken (automake-1.11.1-1+squeeze1,
Forgot to say, touch srclib/apr/include/apr_poll.h will cause apr related
.c to recompile, but still not httpd dependant things.
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
Helo,
on my linux box, latest trunk, when I touch/modify an include file (touch
server/*.h
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
You never know, one can reproduce ?
If one can *not* reproduce I'm interested too...
Regards,
Yann.
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
You never know, one can reproduce ?
If one can *not* reproduce I'm interested too...
My recollection was that in httpd this required a one-time
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 4:37 PM, Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com
wrote:
You never know, one can reproduce ?
If one can *not* reproduce I'm
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 8:19 AM, Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 6:23 AM, Steffen i...@apachelounge.com wrote:
That looks better and so far I can see it is the behavior as with 2.3.7.
Keep it running at AL. When I see some strange, I shall report.
That is good
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 1:06 AM, Chris Darroch chr...@pearsoncmg.com wrote:
Chris Darroch wrote:
The intent of r1357986 was to deal with a particular, wonky
sub-case, when the Authorizer returns 200 (so the spec paragraph
doesn't apply in this case, as it's a 200 OK response), but adds
a
K
On 4 okt. 2013, at 22:15, Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 8:19 AM, Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 6:23 AM, Steffen i...@apachelounge.com wrote:
That looks better and so far I can see it is the behavior as with 2.3.7.
Keep it
Tarballs/zips are at http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/mod_fcgid/
Shortcut to changes:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/mod_fcgid/CHANGES-FCGID
The difference with 2.3.8 is that one of the regressions found in 2.3.8 has
been reverted and and the other has been fixed.
+/-1
[ ] Release mod_fcgid
I'm wondering if anyone else is seeing an frame opcode 12 on
socket.disconnect() when using socket.io with mod_proxy_wstunnel. I have a
fairly simple replication setup that I'm investigating.
I'm using apache 2.2.25 with a backported mod_proxy_wstunnel patch from 2.4.6.
I'm seeing an
Continuing to look at this, I can show a packet trace where everything looks
normal between the httpd and the node.js server on close. But if I do the same
trace between the httpd and the browser I can see malformed a websocket packet
when the stream closes.
I'm not sure what (if anything) in
Works for me
VC9 x86 x64
VC12 x86 x64
XP, Server 2003, Vista Server 2012
[+1] Release mod_fcgid 2.3.9 as GA
Jeff Trawick wrote:
The app is out of spec either way. I think the trunk behavior is better.
I'd agree on both counts (the latter IMHO, of course). For reference,
here's a breakdown of 2.3.7 vs. trunk behaviour for Authorizers:
Authorizer response2.3.7
[+1 ] Release mod_fcgid 2.3.9 as GA
works for me on Debian 7 (x64)
16 matches
Mail list logo
