Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.59-rc1 as httpd-2.4.59

+1: macOS 14.4.1/Xcode 15.3, CentOS8, Ubuntu 18.04LTS, 20.04LTS, 22.04LTS > On Apr 3, 2024, at 8:26 AM, Eric Covener wrote: > > Hi all, > > (After only minor embarrassment of patching tags/2.4.55 instead of 2.4.x...) > > Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures: > >

Re: mod_systemd: refactor to get rid of libsystemd dependency?

+1 > On Apr 4, 2024, at 5:43 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: > > > > On 4/3/24 4:32 PM, Joe Orton wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 12:25:40PM +0200, Rainer Jung wrote: >>> Hi there, >>> >>> in the light of the recent xz attack I was wondering, whether we should also >>> reduce our library

Re: age in proxy_balancer_method

nt to give the past a smaller > influence on the balancing decision than the more recent activity. > > I hope that's understandable and maybe Jim remembers something similar to > that. > > Best regards, > > Rainer > > Am 21.12.23 um 08:23 schrieb jean-frederic cl

Re: age in proxy_balancer_method

I'll have to go back through my notes... I do recall adding fields that although were not being used at the time, were _going to be used_ as some point, and I didn't want to have to worry about ABI compatibility. > On Dec 14, 2023, at 8:27 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote: > > Hi, > > Any

Re: svn commit: r1912245 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy: balancers/mod_lbmethod_bybusyness.c mod_proxy_balancer.c proxy_util.c proxy_util.h

> On Nov 28, 2023, at 4:29 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 3:28 PM Ruediger Pluem > wrote: >> >> On 11/24/23 10:59 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: >>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 5:47 PM Ruediger Pluem wrote: On 11/23/23 5:05 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote:

Re: balancers bybusyness, bytraffic and byrequest thread/process safe issues

IIRC, the goal of having an "aging" function was to handle this exact kind of thing, where values could be normalized over a long period of time so that old entries that may skew results are not weighted as heavily as new ones. > On Aug 30, 2023, at 11:19 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote: > >

Re: balancers bybusyness, bytraffic and byrequest thread/process safe issues

Isn't the call to find the best balancer mutex protected? > On Aug 31, 2023, at 7:44 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote: > > On 8/30/23 17:33, Rainer Jung wrote: >> Hi JFC, >> I have not checked ur current code, but the topic reminds me of our history >> in mod_jk land. There we switched the

Re: [VOTE] Switch read/write repository from Subversion to Git

> On May 4, 2023, at 4:34 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: > > This is a formal vote on whether we should move our read/write repository > from Subversion to Git. > This means that our latest read/write repository will be no longer available > via svn.apache.org. It > will be available via Git at

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.55-rc1 as httpd-2.4.55

> On Jan 10, 2023, at 8:40 AM, Eric Covener wrote: > > Hi all, > > Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/ > > I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release > this candidate tarball httpd-2.4.55-rc1 as

Re: friends of mod_proxy

+1 > On Oct 11, 2022, at 3:47 AM, Stefan Eissing via dev > wrote: > > > >> Am 10.10.2022 um 20:39 schrieb Ruediger Pluem : >> >> >> >> On 10/10/22 6:35 PM, Eric Covener wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 11:55 AM Yann Ylavic wrote: On Fri, Oct 7, 2022 at 9:14 PM Ruediger Pluem

Re: friends of mod_proxy

Yeah... The logic in not re-using a worker is that the pattern matching aspect made it both difficult and somewhat inconsistent due to the dynamic nature of the situation, hence the use of the "default" worker for these. We now have the functionality to handle this, but it is still a

Git(Hub) workflow

Do we have an approved and official Git(Hub) based workflow defined?

Re: Named shared memory on macOS Monterey

ded? I've > lost the errors, ended up commenting out the mod and re-running > Makefiles.PL to get unblocked. > > On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 3:26 PM Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >> Anyone else notice that the later version of macOS really prefer >> that APR use posix for sha

Named shared memory on macOS Monterey

Anyone else notice that the later version of macOS really prefer that APR use posix for shared memory for both anon and name-based, instead of posix for anon and sysv/ipc for name? The issue seems to be that the kernel params are much lower than previous versions as well as it being

Re: svn commit: r1899390 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk: CHANGES modules/proxy/mod_proxy.c modules/proxy/mod_proxy.h

It was added in anticipation of the capability to be folded in, and done so "now" so that it would;t require any API changes. Unless it's actually breaking something, I'd vote to simply keep it > On Apr 1, 2022, at 3:42 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote: > > On 01/04/2022 08:47, jean-frederic

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.53-rc2 as httpd-2.4.53

> On Mar 9, 2022, at 11:19 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote: > > Hi all, > > Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/ > > I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release > this candidate tarball httpd-2.4.53-rc2

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.53-rc1 as httpd-2.4.53

> On Mar 9, 2022, at 8:58 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 2:45 PM Stefan Eissing > wrote: >> >>> Am 09.03.2022 um 14:25 schrieb Yann Ylavic : >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 8, 2022 at 6:22 PM Rainer Jung wrote: - configure for APR in the

Re: backports

> On Mar 8, 2022, at 7:58 AM, Graham Leggett wrote: > > > I would far rather the empty APLOGNO check was part of the build. > > Vastly simpler. > I agree w/ that...

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.53-rc1 as httpd-2.4.53

> On Mar 7, 2022, at 10:55 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote: > > Hi all, > > Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/ > > I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release > this candidate tarball httpd-2.4.53-rc1

Re: backports

> On Mar 7, 2022, at 6:28 AM, Graham Leggett wrote: > > On 07 Mar 2022, at 11:21, Stefan Eissing > wrote: > >> I'd really like, as a reviewer of backports, you can: >> - see that it passes all our tests. No need to patch/compile/test locally. > > “No need to

Re: backports

> On Mar 4, 2022, at 12:40 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > >> On Mar 4, 2022, at 6:17 AM, Eric Covener wrote: >> >> On Fri, Mar 4, 2022 at 9:05 AM Jim Jagielski wrote: >>> >>> A question: Would it be easier for all this if we moved to being Github

Re: backports

A question: Would it be easier for all this if we moved to being Github canon? > On Mar 4, 2022, at 5:08 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote: > > We should improve our backport procedure and provide guidance on how to use > it after the next release. > > Post-mortem dbm backport: > - the patch pointed

Re: svn commit: r1898566 - in /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x: ./ modules/aaa/ modules/cache/ modules/dav/fs/ modules/dav/lock/ modules/mappers/ modules/proxy/

Do we have a users guide for this specific implementation and setup? TIA! Cheers

c99

I'm guessing we all heard the news that Linux is switching to c99 from c89. Time for us to consider it as well?

Re: intent to make a release candidate on Monday

All three promoted. I went ahead and merged the 'dbm' patch > On Mar 3, 2022, at 4:37 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote: > > There are some important fixes pending release. Work does not appear to > slow down in the foreseeable future, so I'd like us to make them available. > > Looking at 2.4.x STATUS,

Re: mod_tls as experimental module?

Add it in :-) > On Nov 24, 2021, at 4:46 AM, ste...@eissing.org wrote: > > Coming back to this. Since there was no feedback on my post: are people > just too occupied/opposed/not interested? > > Curious, > Stefan > >> Am 18.11.2021 um 18:48 schrieb ste...@eissing.org: >> >> How would you feel

Re: reporting the bytes read and transferred to the worker from the tunnel

LGTM > On May 5, 2021, at 5:59 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote: > > Hi, > > I have noted that when using websocket the bytes read and transfered by the > worker when using the tunnel are not taken in account. > > I have a patch attached, for comments ;-) > > Any better ideas how to fix that?

Apachecon

Anyone submitting any httpd related proposals for AC2021?

Xcode 12

Anyone hacking away on httpd and/or APR w/ Xcode 12? On my system at least it is throwing errors about -Werror,-Wimplicit-function-declaration, and not enabling IPv6: checking if APR supports IPv6... no -- no working getaddrinfo also likely due to an error when compiling because of

Warning: Xcode12 breaks apr* and httpd

The upgrade from Xcode11 -> Xcode12 has been reported to break builds for APR and httpd... Issues seem to be some sort of forced C99 compliance and not discovering IPv6 capability. I'm not upgrading anytime soon so no idea how bad it is.

Re: Changing the httpd security process

++1. I was never quite happy with this process, but it seemed like there was a lot of support for this kind of treatment. > On Aug 17, 2020, at 7:08 AM, Joe Orton wrote: > > > This roughly reverts the httpd process to what we used prior to adopting > the Tomcat-esque policy for the whole

Re: Pending fixes or reroll? Was: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.45

+1 > On Jul 31, 2020, at 9:41 AM, Eric Covener wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 9:37 AM Rainer Jung wrote: >> >> Since there wasn't yet any reaction to Daniel's question: Is anybody >> right now working on more warnings fixes for Windows? >> > > Not me. I don't think we should wait on

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.45

> On Jul 30, 2020, at 5:55 AM, Christophe JAILLET > wrote: > > I wouldn't say it is a show stopper, but I thought that we had a travis job > for that. > Apparently, it is on trunk only (see r1879370 which is not backported, maybe > on purpose) > I agree that it's not a show-stopper but

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.44

I'll hold off testing and voting until we hear from the RM on whether this release is DOA or not... > On Jul 29, 2020, at 8:02 AM, Stefan Eissing > wrote: > > -1. > > I have to apologise. I missed an important change in HTTP/2 that I like to > get in the release. This is about removing

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T late this week

Sure. Go ahead. +1 > On Jul 22, 2020, at 7:32 PM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: > > Hi, all; > It's been a while since we've rolled a release and gotten fixes/etc in our > community's hands. Apologies for not suggesting this sooner. How about a T > Friday? That will let vote run through the weekend.

Re: svn commit: r1879285 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk: CHANGES docs/manual/mod/core.xml include/ap_mmn.h include/http_core.h include/http_protocol.h include/httpd.h modules/dav/fs/repos.c modules/test/mod_

> On Jun 29, 2020, at 10:27 AM, Graham Leggett wrote: > > On 29 Jun 2020, at 14:49, Yann Ylavic > wrote: > >>> Yes we can and should (but in separate commits). >>> >>> I have my eye on the r->proxyreq flag, we can pack this into the binary >>> notes too, values

Re: RFC: Documenting changes in the CHANGES file

Works for me. > On May 29, 2020, at 3:30 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: > > Reviewing our backport process I noticed that in many cases a clean merge via > svn merge fails due to conflicts in CHANGES. While > these are easy to solve it puts IMHO unnecessary extra work on the backport > process,

Re: Building from svn on MacOS

I always have svn co of apr and apr-util in srclib when I build from SVN

Re: svn commit: r1876511 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/core/mod_watchdog.c

very, very elegant. > On Apr 14, 2020, at 8:37 AM, jor...@apache.org wrote: > > Author: jorton > Date: Tue Apr 14 12:37:17 2020 > New Revision: 1876511 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1876511=rev > Log: > * modules/core/mod_watchdog.c: Switch to simpler logic to avoid the > thread

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.43

+1: o macOS 10.14.6, Xcode 11.3.1 (Event MPM): No regressions - Perl test framework o CentOS 6.10, 64bit (Event and Worker MPM): No regressions - Perl test framework o CentOS 7.7, 64bit (Event and Worker MPM): No regressions - Perl test framework > On Mar 26, 2020, at 10:50 AM, Daniel

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.42

Based on this, I change my vote to -1 > On Mar 19, 2020, at 11:19 AM, Eric Covener wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 10:45 AM Daniel Ruggeri > wrote: >> >> Hi, all; >>Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures: >>

Re: async filters still borked (was Re: svn commit: r1874775 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/test/README.travis)

+1 from me. > On Mar 20, 2020, at 9:46 AM, Joe Orton wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 06, 2020 at 09:30:41AM +0100, Ruediger Pluem wrote: >> On 3/4/20 9:23 AM, jor...@apache.org wrote: >>> Author: jorton >>> Date: Wed Mar 4 08:23:55 2020 >>> New Revision: 1874775 >>> >>> URL:

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.42

+1: macOS 10.14.6, Xcode 11.3.1: No regressions - Perl test framework Will try to test on CentOS 6-8 today > On Mar 19, 2020, at 10:45 AM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: > > Hi, all; > Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/ > >

Netcraft

Wow. Was Netcraft actually somewhat kind to Apache httpd? They actually admitted some areas where httpd is doing better, and still does better, market-share wise, than nginx.

Re: Add an entry in CHANGES file for Travis CI testing

++1 > On Feb 11, 2020, at 12:43 PM, Mike Rumph wrote: > > With the talk of releasing 2.4.42, I was thinking that it might be a good > idea to add some mention of the Travis CI testing that was added in this > release. > Perhaps something in the CHANGES file that gives a summary of the results

Time for 2.4.42?

Seems like a good time to propose a release... I can RM if desired.

Your Apache HTTPD story

The CFP (Call For Papers) for ApacheCon NA 2020 is now open, and one major topic will be regarding the one project that started it all: Apache httpd. I am coordinating the Apache httpd track, and I am encouraging not only developers but more importantly USERS of the Apache web server to submit

Re: Time for httpd 2.6.x?

> On Nov 1, 2019, at 11:59 AM, Luca Toscano wrote: > > Il giorno mar 29 ott 2019 alle ore 18:31 Graham Leggett > mailto:minf...@sharp.fm>> ha scritto: >> >> On 29 Oct 2019, at 15:51, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >>> My only question regards workf

Re: Time for httpd 2.6.x?

> On Oct 29, 2019, at 9:36 AM, Eric Covener wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 9:18 AM Luca Toscano > wrote: >> >> Hi everybody, >> >> Il giorno ven 25 ott 2019 alle ore 12:52 Yann Ylavic >> ha scritto: >>> >>> So how about: >>> 0. github workflow?

Re: svn commit: r1860166 - in /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x: ./ docs/manual/mod/ include/ modules/http2/ modules/proxy/ server/

Yikes! How can we test for that via the Perl test framework? > On Oct 29, 2019, at 9:45 AM, Rainer Jung wrote: > > Aha, and this is due to the fact, that r1656259 "mod_proxy_http: don't > connect or reuse backend before prefetching request body." or parts of it was > backported from trunk to

Re: Time for httpd 2.6.x?

> On Oct 25, 2019, at 6:59 AM, Graham Leggett wrote: > > On 24 Oct 2019, at 14:14, Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> Going from 2.4.x to 2.6.x implies an ABI break... Up to now, all backports >> from trunk have maintained the 2.4.x ABI backwards compatibility. >> &g

Re: Time for httpd 2.6.x?

Going from 2.4.x to 2.6.x implies an ABI break... Up to now, all backports from trunk have maintained the 2.4.x ABI backwards compatibility. So I would propose that if we do the below, which I am fine w/ BTW, that the 1st issues we tackle after branching 2.6.x from httpd-24 are all the ABI

Re: svn commit: r1868456 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS

> On Oct 14, 2019, at 3:14 PM, jaillet...@apache.org wrote: > > Author: jailletc36 > Date: Mon Oct 14 19:14:04 2019 > New Revision: 1868456 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1868456=rev > Log: > Add a note > > Modified: >httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS > > Modified:

Re: httpd 2.4 and maintainer-mode

Yeah, this seems clang specific... > On Oct 14, 2019, at 2:48 PM, Marion & Christophe JAILLET > wrote: > > > Le 14/10/2019 à 17:15, Jim Jagielski a écrit : >> >>> On Oct 10, 2019, at 2:49 PM, Marion & Christophe JAILLET >>> wrote: >

Re: httpd 2.4 and maintainer-mode

> On Oct 10, 2019, at 2:49 PM, Marion & Christophe JAILLET > wrote: > > I guess that my version of GCC (i.e. 8.3.0) tolerates some c89 deviation in > .h files included from "outside". > So you aren't using Xcode and clang?

Re: httpd 2.4 and maintainer-mode

> - Stefan > >> Am 10.10.2019 um 14:10 schrieb Jim Jagielski : >> >> I am using MacPorts libxml2. But the issue seems to be w/ libxml2 itself; it >> is the package that uses the '//' comment style. Where does your build grab >> its xml2 stuff from? >> >

Re: httpd 2.4 and maintainer-mode

as mentioned, this is httpd-2.4... I was curious why I seem to be the only one whom this hits. > On Oct 10, 2019, at 9:43 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 3:42 PM Jim Jagielski <mailto:j...@jagunet.com>> wrote: > Just the issues w/ libxml comments:

Re: httpd 2.4 and maintainer-mode

/ make, and there is nothing >> special. >> >> Any specific issue? >> >> CJ >> >> >> Le 09/10/2019 à 15:33, Jim Jagielski a écrit : >>> Anyone else trying to build HEAD of httpd-2.4 with --enable-maintainer-mode? >>> >

Re: httpd 2.4 and maintainer-mode

cific issue? > > CJ > > > Le 09/10/2019 à 15:33, Jim Jagielski a écrit : >> Anyone else trying to build HEAD of httpd-2.4 with --enable-maintainer-mode? >>

httpd 2.4 and maintainer-mode

Anyone else trying to build HEAD of httpd-2.4 with --enable-maintainer-mode?

ACNA20 and Apache https's 25th anniversary

Next year will be httpd's 25th anniversary. I think it would be great if the web server PMC would commit to having a httpd track at ACNA20... Anyone else interested? We'd need about 6-7 talks to fill the track.

Migrate to git?

Various PMCs have made their default/de-facto SCM git and have seen an increase in contributions and contributors... Is this something the httpd project should consider? Especially w/ the foundation officially supporting Github, it seems like time to have a discussion about it, especially as

Problem w/ Revision 1864435

This breaks building on macOS: Making all in filters /Users/jim/src/asf/code/dev/httpd-trunk/srclib/apr/libtool --silent --mode=link gcc -I/usr/local/include/libxml2 -I/usr/local/include -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations -std=c89 -Werror -Wall

Suggestions

Any suggestions or recommendation for features, capabilities, etc that I should make sure to include in my Apache httpd 2.4 overview preso at ACNA19 next week (or my reverse proxy one)?? Cheers!

Re: [PATCH 63503] - Reverse proxy server - SIGSEGV

Via inspection this looks quite sane. > On Aug 12, 2019, at 3:24 PM, Eric Covener wrote: > > Hi Don, can you try this very similar patch? I applied yours to my > sandbox to get more context and made a few minor changes (including > pre-existing stuff that looked misleading) > >

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.41

Tested: o macOS 10.14.6, Xcode 10.3 (64bit) o CentOS 5, 6 (64bit) o Ubuntu 14.04 LTS (64bit) All +1: no regressions. Thanks for RMing! > On Aug 9, 2019, at 9:40 AM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: > > Hi, all; > Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures: >

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.40

I vote -1 due to the known issue w/ building and running mod_md. Yes, it's not a regression, but the fix is easy and version numbers are cheap. We should release the best possible version each time. Let's mark 2.4.40 DOA and release 2.4.41 w/ the patch. > On Aug 3, 2019, at 9:51 AM, Daniel

Re: release?

ted, but if you > would prefer to, it's all yours, Jim :-) > I wouldn't mind giving it a spin... might be a good way to get a wider UX on the scripting. > Happy weekend! > -- > Daniel Ruggeri > > On July 19, 2019 6:34:10 AM CDT, Jim Jagielski wrote: > +1. If Daniel do

Re: release?

+1. If Daniel doesn't have the time, I can. > On Jul 18, 2019, at 10:06 AM, Stefan Eissing > wrote: > > It would be great if we could make a release this month. There are several > fixes and improvements already backported and a few outstanding issues that > need a vote or two. > > Please

Re: Arranging mod_proxy_balancer to make it provider of balancer/worker.

Go for it! > On May 14, 2019, at 3:40 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote: > > Hi, > > I would like to be able to add worker/balancer from another module > (mod_proxy_cluster) basically using a part of balancer_handler() to make > a provider (like insert_update_worker(params)), any objections or >

Re: ApacheCon call for presentations, httpd content

I can always do my "httpd 2.4 overview" as well as my "httpd 2.4 reverse proxy" talk. > On May 2, 2019, at 10:39 AM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: > > Hi, Rich; > I was looking at the CFP and didn't quite see something that aligns with > httpd. These are the categories allowed: > General >

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.39

My own.. Cheers! > On Mar 28, 2019, at 10:00 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group > wrote: > > What pcre lib did you use on CentOS5? The one provided by CentOS or your own? > > Regards > > Rüdiger > > > C2 General > Von: Jim Jagielski > Ge

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.39

> > C2 General > >> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- >> Von: Jim Jagielski >> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 28. März 2019 13:39 >> An: httpd >> Betreff: Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.39 >> >> >>> On Mar 27, 2019, at 11:09 AM, Daniel Ruggeri >

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.39

> On Mar 27, 2019, at 11:09 AM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: > > Hi, all; > Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/ > > I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release this candidate > tarball as 2.4.39: > [ ]

Re: http://svn.apache.org/r1850745

> On Mar 13, 2019, at 11:04 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > > As you can see, you didn't modify only modules/filters/ ... Maybe you > meant to modify MOD_CPPFLAGS, as modules/http2/modules.mak does? > If that will solve the issue I'm all for it! Thx.

Re: http://svn.apache.org/r1850745

> On Mar 13, 2019, at 8:51 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 1:45 PM Eric Covener wrote: >> >> On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 8:43 AM Jim Jagielski wrote: >>> >>> Is there anyone else building 2.4 on macOS under maintainer-mode >

Re: http://svn.apache.org/r1850745

It's libxml2 from MacPorts... which is basically vanilla libxml2. APR is 1.6.x > On Mar 13, 2019, at 8:56 AM, Nick Kew wrote: > > > >> On 13 Mar 2019, at 12:43, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >> Is there anyone else building 2.4 on macOS under maintainer-mode

http://svn.apache.org/r1850745

Is there anyone else building 2.4 on macOS under maintainer-mode who is also being affected by the above? The fact that I seem to be the anyone "complaining" :) seems weird... Thx!

Re: lmdb, load-balancing, Sharing data about worker nodes among processes and threads in httpd

One of the reasons we use mod_slotmem for load-balancing is that it allows for other storage mechanisms to be used rather than shared memory... mod_slotmem uses the httpd provider mechanism to extend the underlying implementation. As such, we could use LMDB, Geode, as our shared storage. > On

Re: http workshop

i could present > On Jan 28, 2019, at 10:21 AM, Stefan Eissing > wrote: > > The HTTP Workshop is returning 2019 on April 2-4 in Amsterdam > (https://github.com/httpworkshop/workshop2019). While I attended the last > three shops(?), I think it would be a good opportunity for someone else from

Re: Latest test builds

sorry wrong list > On Jan 19, 2019, at 8:16 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > I've uploaded the latest test builds for macOS and Linux 64. > These are based on ~r1851640 and include 2 main updates from > the earlier one: > > o beanshell now included > o macOS path bu

Latest test builds

I've uploaded the latest test builds for macOS and Linux 64. These are based on ~r1851640 and include 2 main updates from the earlier one: o beanshell now included o macOS path bug should now be squashed (https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127965) Let me know if anyone wants me to

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.38

+1: Tested on: o macOS 10.14.2, Xcode 10.1 o CentOS7 Will do more testing today but so far, so good. Thx for RMing! > On Jan 17, 2019, at 1:49 PM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: > > Hi, all; > Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures: >

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.28

Ahhh good. > On Jan 17, 2019, at 12:46 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 6:44 PM Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >> Note that simply changing the commit msg logs does not solve the problem. >> There is, >> in fact, no 2.4.38 tag at all. And I'

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.28

Note that simply changing the commit msg logs does not solve the problem. There is, in fact, no 2.4.38 tag at all. And I'm guessing we destroyed the "real" 2.4.28 tag... :(

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.28

Shouldn't this be 2.4.38?? > On Jan 17, 2019, at 12:13 PM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: > > Hi, all; > Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/ > > I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release this candidate >

Re: svn commit: r1851549 - /httpd/httpd/tags/2.4.28/2.4.x/

2.4.28? > On Jan 17, 2019, at 12:08 PM, drugg...@apache.org wrote: > > Author: druggeri > Date: Thu Jan 17 17:08:22 2019 > New Revision: 1851549 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1851549=rev > Log: > Tag HEAD of 2.4.x as 2.4.28 > > Added: >httpd/httpd/tags/2.4.28/2.4.x/ (props

Re: svn commit: r1850745 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/filters/config.m4

I specifically didn't use #pragma GCC diagnostic push in order to avoid this exact kind of discussion... > On Jan 16, 2019, at 4:46 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > I'm sorry but I'm confused. The patch is as specific as you can get. It just > adds the minimal option and JUST for filt

Re: svn commit: r1850745 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/filters/config.m4

d/httpd/trunk/modules/filters/config.m4 > > > > > > > > > Am 16.01.2019 um 03:33 schrieb William A Rowe Jr > clan.net <http://clan.net/>>: > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 8:37 AM Jim Jagielski > > <mailto:j...@jagunet.com>

Re: svn commit: r1850745 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/filters/config.m4

> On Jan 15, 2019, at 9:21 AM, Eric Covener wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 9:14 AM Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >> >> >> On Jan 9, 2019, at 7:41 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: >> >> Hi Jim, >> >> Does CFLAGS -std=c99 solve your iss

Re: [NOTICE] Intent to T 2.4.28

Could I please get one more vote on adding in mod_socache_redis from trunk... It's been waiting for several releases by now. > On Jan 15, 2019, at 7:27 AM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: > > Hi, all; > It's been a while since we've rolled a release and we've had some recent > movement, so I'd like to

Re: svn commit: r1850745 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/filters/config.m4

> On Jan 9, 2019, at 7:41 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > Does CFLAGS -std=c99 solve your issue? It seems to work here. I'm building on > the Fedora 29, largely frozen end-of-july. Reverting the patch below and > toggling -std=c89 to -std=c99 in configure.in

Re: [PATCH] fix test/mod_dialup.c for non-threaded APR

+1 by me. > On Jan 8, 2019, at 7:09 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote: > > See https://svn.apache.org/r1663375 for a related fix by covener. > Which, by the way, should probably be backported to 2.4; I see a failure > on a buildbot which deliberately builds with non-threaded APR to ensure > that this

Jim's been busy

I've been slammed both at work and personal and haven't had time to do much httpd stuff... just a FYI in case people were curious. Should free up by the end of the month.

Re: Plan to add sandbox branch

Hmmm... this has me thinking about maybe using the provider interface to implement the communication mechanism... let me mull this over. > On Nov 30, 2018, at 8:27 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > Yeah, I looked for something else, esp various pubsub implementations, but > they reall

Re: Plan to add sandbox branch

Yeah, I looked for something else, esp various pubsub implementations, but they really didn't fit in with what was needed. > On Nov 29, 2018, at 3:02 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote: > > On 29/11/2018 07:02, Christophe JAILLET wrote: >> Le 28/11/2018 à 02:33, Daniel Ruggeri a écrit : >>> Hi,

Re: Plan to add sandbox branch

n between httpd and the backends, we could add something like a CONFIG survey that allows for the backends to "suggest" params. > -- > Daniel Ruggeri > > On November 27, 2018 5:23:25 AM CST, Jim Jagielski wrote: > In the coming week or so, I will be committing my load bal

Plan to add sandbox branch

In the coming week or so, I will be committing my load balance, load determination and discovery work to a sandbox trunk. Many people have asked for more info, so here we go. Basically, this new feature uses nanomsg (nng) to implement the SURVEY protocol between workers (nodes) and the front end

Re: 2.4.38

> On Nov 9, 2018, at 2:54 PM, Graham Leggett wrote: > > On 09 Nov 2018, at 17:51, Stefan Eissing wrote: > >> So, the chance is high that releases we do will work for most of you. >> AND the chance is high that releases might break something for some of you >> (hopefully a few). > > The

Re: Load balancing and load determination

I have a semi-working implementation that I'll be committing to trunk in a bit... > On Nov 8, 2018, at 1:33 AM, Mladen Turk wrote: > > On 30.10.2018. 13:53, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> As some of you know, one of my passions and area of focus is >> on the use of Apache htt

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >