On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 3:01 PM, Paul Querna p...@querna.org wrote:
I think we have all joked on and off about 3.0 for... well about 8 years now.
At least!
I think there are exciting things happening in C however.
I love C, but unless we can come up with something radical, it's hard
to see a
On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 3:55 PM, Mark Watts m.wa...@eris.qinetiq.com wrote:
I often need to configure httpd to Listen on more than one IP an a
range, and more than one port.
Are these being used with IP-based virtual hosts? It might be easier to create
an option that allows each such vhost to be
Just a reminder; Intention is to release 1.3.42 on Tuesday. If anyone
has strong feelings, make them known :-) Nóirín has kindly translated
the announcement into English;
http://people.apache.org/~noirin/Announcement1.3.txt
2010/1/27 Colm MacCárthaigh c...@allcosts.net:
2010/1/27 Colm
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 3:40 AM, Sander Temme scte...@apache.org wrote:
Why don't we do this: roll the same tag with the docs fixes as you indicate
immediately above; sign, hash and put them up on dev/dist. Then call 72
hours. We have a quick look to see if smoke emerges and, if not, we can
2010/1/27 Colm MacCárthaigh c...@allcosts.net:
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 10:15 PM, Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/1/27 Colm MacCárthaigh c...@allcosts.net:
I still can't figure out where the repos for dev/dist or dist/ are
hosted. None of the docs seem up to date.
https
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 12:43 AM, Sander Temme scte...@apache.org wrote:
On Jan 8, 2010, at 4:29 AM, Colm MacCárthaigh wrote:
There is a 1.3.42 release candidate for testing, and voting, at;
What happened to this, besides making Slashdot?
I transited the atlantic twice. I actually wasted
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
are any developers of apache (core, modules) coming to FOSDEM in Brussels?
I'll probably be there on the 7th. Any year I've gone there's usually
been a few httpd people around.
--
Colm
On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Rainer Jung rainer.j...@kippdata.de wrote:
There's one other manual related thing I wasn't thinking enough about before
writing my last mail: the 1.3.42 manual contains SSI #include virtual
statements, the 1.3.41 version not. I (wildly) guess the script
(long). Reported by Adam Zabrocki.
[Colm MacCárthaigh
*) Protect logresolve from mismanaged DNS records that return
blank/null hostnames. [Jim Jagielski]
Notes;
this is intended as the final release of Apache httpd 1.3, which has
reached end of life. Security updates may continue
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Sander Temme scte...@apache.org wrote:
On Jan 8, 2010, at 9:41 AM, Sander Temme wrote:
On Jan 8, 2010, at 4:29 AM, Colm MacCárthaigh wrote:
There is a 1.3.42 release candidate for testing, and voting, at;
http://people.apache.org/~colm/1.3.42
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 7:50 PM, Brian Havard brian.hav...@gmail.com wrote:
Colm MacCárthaigh wrote:
There is a 1.3.42 release candidate for testing, and voting, at;
http://people.apache.org/~colm/1.3.42/
I just tried building on a fairly stock Ubuntu Karmic system and ran
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 9:54 PM, Stefan Fritsch s...@sfritsch.de wrote:
mod_rewrite incorrectly omits the brackets around literal IPv6
addresses in redirects. Similar issues have been fixed at other places
in the code already. In server/core.c there is
get_server_name_for_url(), a wrapper
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 6:58 PM, Rainer Jung rainer.j...@kippdata.de wrote:
File htdocs/manual/misc/FAQ.html was previously 150KB and now is only 5KB. I
didn't yet load it from the web server itself, but it seems some generation
step was missing. The file installed by make install has the same
Based on this thread, I'll going to commit an EOL notice later today
(1.3.x is still CTR) and language nits and so on can be fixed with
patches/commits as appropriate, and if anyone feels strongly they can
revert :-)
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 1:28 AM, Jorge Schrauwen
jorge.schrau...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think there's much interest in merging any of the patches that
are currently in the STATUS, so I'm intending to a roll a 1.3.x
release Friday for testing/voting. With a release next week.
Unfortunately testing 1.3.x is more painful than it used to be, and so
far I haven't managed to get
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 8:55 PM, Rich Bowen rbo...@rcbowen.com wrote:
On Jan 5, 2010, at 15:31 , Jorge Schrauwen wrote:
+1 (non-binding) There are still to many questions about the 1.3
branch on the support channels IMHO
One hopes that a formal EOL statement will be the encouragement that
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Graham Leggett minf...@sharp.fm wrote:
It sounds to me like it may be a bit of a pandora's box making another
release. Is it not possible to just make a patch available?
It sure is a PITA, but I think it would be more professional to get a
final release out
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Rainer Jung rainer.j...@kippdata.de wrote:
So there's only one source update and the update of the mime.types. Is that
worth a release?
There's a pending security fix too that will be committed before the roll.
--
Colm
Observers of the commits list may have noticed some small cleanups to
the 1.3.x branch earlier today. There are currently a number of
several years-old backport/patch proposals in there too, including two
marked as release show-stoppers (neither actually stopped the show,
when last we had a
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 12:45 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
wr...@rowe-clan.netwrote:
I have essentially finished mod_remoteip at this point and am looking
to find out the interest level of adopting this as a core module into
trunk (modules/metadata/ appears to be the most appropriate target)?
+1
On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Paul Querna p...@querna.org wrote:
I believe there have been bug reports/requests to allow changing the
Server header, but no one has complained about Date: before.
Heh, I made it modifiable, and provided a patch iirc , but noone else liked
it :-)
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 4:30 PM, Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+/-1
[ ] Release httpd-2.2.11 as GA
+1 , tested on EC2 with Ubuntu and Redhat :-)
--
Colm
For one reason or another, I need to be able to invalidate cache
entries in some mod_cache caches. There's no good standard for this,
WCIP/BEEP went nowhere afaict, but I want to keep things simple. The
way Squid handles this is by implementing a non-standard PURGE HTTP
method, so I've taken the
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Dirk-Willem van Gulik
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
something more like mod_proxy_balancer's full-scale html interface for
doing this kind of thing at run-time?
No, totally nut - bot I am much more interested in a deeper, programmatic,
interface - which I can hook
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 1:59 PM, Akins, Brian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How we handle purge:
Oh that reminds me, a long time ago, I wrote htcacheadmin - a generic
command line utility for administering mod_disk_cache caches. Which is
how I /used/ to handle this situation. (I've attached the
On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 03:07:36PM +0100, Jeroen Massar wrote:
First, congrats with 2.0.44 ;)
*) Introduce the EnableSendfile directive, allowing users of NFS
shares to disable sendfile mechanics when they either fail
outright or provide intermitantly corrupted data. PR
On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 04:36:58PM +1100, Stas Bekman wrote:
Consider this mod_cgi script:
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
print Content-type: text/plain\n\n;
print no_such_func();
print Shouldn't be printed;
httpd.conf:
ScriptAlias /cgi-bin/ /home/httpd/2.0/perl/
The error is correctly logged:
On Wed, Jan 01, 2003 at 10:43:18PM +, Thom May wrote:
* Aaron Bannert ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
The log is generated from the suexec binary, not httpd, right?
Then we can't use a directive to control it and it needs to be
hardcoded for safety.
The other issue for suexec is mass
On Sun, Dec 08, 2002 at 10:57:32PM +0100, Jochen Kächelin wrote:
Will perchild work on the next release or are there any other
workarounds to secure php-scripts (module) such as suEXEC and cgis?
if you *need* mod_php instances that run as seperate users the
easiest solution is to reverse proxy
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 07:16:02AM +, Joe Orton wrote:
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 11:38:06PM +, Colm MacCárthaigh wrote:
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 11:05:21PM +, Joe Orton wrote:
Colm, can you try running the apr/test/sendfile binary with your
machines?
It was one of the first
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 11:30:29AM +, Joe Orton wrote:
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 10:54:53AM +, Colm MacCárthaigh wrote:
..
telnet [v6addr] 80
GET / HTTP/1.1
Host: madeup.tld
observe lack of response
Have you verified with tcpdump/ethereal etc that this hang is because
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 04:17:53PM +, Joe Orton wrote:
To summarize some off-list dicussion - the kernel guys have said that
using sendfile on IPv6 sockets may trigger bugs in cards which do
hardware TCP checksumming for card/driver/OS combinations which support
that. (since the cards have
On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 11:33:27PM +0100, Jeroen Massar wrote:
Colm MacCarthaigh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
On Mon, Dec 02, 2002 at 02:48:53PM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Colm MacCarthaigh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Linux (2.4.18 and 2.4.19, for me anyway) with apache versions
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 07:12:04AM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Colm MacCárthaigh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
O.k., now that is interesting, another thing I've noticed is that when
the encoding is chunked, I can't replicate the problem. Presumably the
problem is related to how much data
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 12:25:49PM +, Colm MacCárthaigh wrote:
My tests (and patch) were based on apr and apr-util from CVS ,
with the 2.0.43 codebase, because CVS seems broken right now.
stupid pre-test patch, here's the real one:
Index: configure.in
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 08:21:36AM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Colm MacCárthaigh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 12:25:49PM +, Colm MacCárthaigh wrote:
My tests (and patch) were based on apr and apr-util from CVS ,
with the 2.0.43 codebase, because CVS seems broken
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 02:29:29PM -, David Reid wrote:
In the interest of tying up loose ends, I'm still concerned with your
observation that --disable-sendfile didn't do the right thing... did
you make distclean before re-configuring?
The problem there was that
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 11:05:21PM +, Joe Orton wrote:
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 08:21:36AM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Colm MacCárthaigh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 12:25:49PM +, Colm MacCárthaigh wrote:
My tests (and patch) were based on apr and apr-util
On Thu, Jun 20, 2002 at 05:30:52PM -0400, Greg Ames wrote:
We ought to be able to have our cake and eat it too. It is easy to turn off
keepalives based on the original type passed to ap_die. I think you're saying
there's now a dependency that r-status matches the original type on exit,
I havnt tracked down a cause yet, but this happens with the 2.0.38
tarball, the 2.0.39 one, and the current HEAD. I'm running Solaris
2.8 on sparc,
colmmacc@prodigy (~) $ uname -a
SunOS prodigy 5.8 Generic_108528-13 sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-4
it's a nice and beefy E450. I was running 2.0.36
On Wed, Jun 19, 2002 at 01:32:00AM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Wed, Jun 19, 2002 at 09:26:46AM +0100, Colm MacCárthaigh wrote:
I havnt tracked down a cause yet, but this happens with the 2.0.38
tarball, the 2.0.39 one, and the current HEAD. I'm running Solaris
2.8 on sparc
Since there have been some changes to the affected source files
and multiple problems presented themselves in unixd.c, my patches
to make suexec + [ mod_include | mod_userdir | mod_cgid ] work
were getting stale. So I've rediffed them against CVS.
I also had a good look through all of the
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 01:03:03AM +0100, Colm MacCárthaigh wrote:
The following patch reverts to the previous and documented
bevahiour (exhibited by 1.3). Currently !--exec cmd
does not work with suexec enabled as the proc.c will try to
run : shell -c suexec uid gid ... so on.
snip patch
The following patch reverts to the previous and documented
bevahiour (exhibited by 1.3). Currently !--exec cmd
does not work with suexec enabled as the proc.c will try to
run : shell -c suexec uid gid ... so on.
Index: os/unix/unixd.c
A few weeks ago I opened Bug 7810, which was suexec not working
with mod_userdir with either mod_cgi or mod_cgid. Anyway, Justin
kindly applied a modified patch of mine to fix mod_cgi .. up
until today I have been simply too busy to look at it .. but
here's a patch that makes
On Sun, Apr 28, 2002 at 10:55:59AM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
This is a message from the person who originally filed PR 7810.
I am not familiar enough with mod_cgid to verify his patch or
to get suexec working with worker. -- justin
Just to clarify , the patch below doesnt fix it at all
46 matches
Mail list logo
