Am 25.02.2013 08:54, schrieb Justin Erenkrantz:
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 5:27 AM, Justin Erenkrantz jus...@erenkrantz.com
mailto:jus...@erenkrantz.com wrote:
Anybody know if it still exists in Illumos? This sounds like a fun thing
to tackle next week in Portland. =)
(I'll be
On 18 Feb 2013, at 10:34 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.4 can be found
at the usual place:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.4 GA.
NOTE: The -deps tarballs are
.
Is there a test suite available for testing all functions?
Regards,
Jie Gao
* Rainer Jung rainer.j...@kippdata.de wrote:
Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2013 20:57:24 +0100
From: Rainer Jung rainer.j...@kippdata.de
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.4 as GA
User
On Sat, 2013-02-23 at 13:29 +0100, Rainer Jung wrote:
Concerning the apr_password_validate() problem in APU 1.5.1 and related
httpd release testing failures:
The bug was fixed in
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revisionrevision=1449309
Don't know how I could stare so long at the code
On 24.02.2013 09:33, Jie Gao wrote:
I have tested it on Solaris 11 on sparc hardware with gcc, and the build
succeeded.
...
httpd started OK.
Is there a test suite available for testing all functions?
For starters there's a README at:
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 5:27 AM, Justin Erenkrantz jus...@erenkrantz.comwrote:
Anybody know if it still exists in Illumos? This sounds like a fun thing
to tackle next week in Portland. =) (I'll be there all week.) -- justin
As far as I can tell, multiple listeners and graceful are fine
Concerning the apr_password_validate() problem in APU 1.5.1 and related
httpd release testing failures:
The bug was fixed in
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revisionrevision=1449309
Don't know how I could stare so long at the code without seeing the
obvious bug. Thanks to the reporter of PR
On 18.02.2013 21:34, Jim Jagielski wrote:
The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.4 can be found
at the usual place:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.4 GA.
NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 03:34:15PM -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote:
The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.4 can be found
at the usual place:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.4 GA.
NOTE: The -deps tarballs are
On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 15:34:15 -0500
Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.4 can be found
at the usual place:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
[X] +1: Good to go
Glad for no bundled apr-util, this will make things so much easier
if
: *** Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.4 as GA
So far, I just see one -1 from rjung due to the weird Solaris
bug he's hitting, but it also seems Sol10 specific. The
-deps bug appears more (only) an APR issue and not something
with httpd itself, so ... ;)
After 72+ hours, I call the vote closed. results are:
+1: rjung(*), steffen, humbedooh(*), covener(*), jim(*), gls,
jorton(*), wrowe(*)
+0: NULL
-1: rjung (but only Solaris)
With the final tally APPROVING release.
Thx to all voters and testers!
I will move the release artifacts
Anybody know if it still exists in Illumos? This sounds like a fun thing
to tackle next week in Portland. =) (I'll be there all week.) -- justin
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 8:01 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
That is one ugly bug...
On Feb 19, 2013, at 7:50 PM, Rainer Jung
Don't forget to VOTE!
On Feb 18, 2013, at 3:34 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.4 can be found
at the usual place:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.4 GA.
NOTE:
+1 notwithstanding other investigations into e.g. -deps
AIX/XLC/PPC64:
For posterity (on a reinstalled AIX 7.1 system)
Test Summary Report
---
t/modules/proxy.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 17 Failed: 2)
Failed tests: 9-10
t/ssl/proxy.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 172 Failed:
So far, I just see one -1 from rjung due to the weird Solaris
bug he's hitting, but it also seems Sol10 specific. The
-deps bug appears more (only) an APR issue and not something
with httpd itself, so ... ;)
Like with 2.2.24, is it advised on Windows to use apr-util 1.4.1 with 2.4.4
?
Steffen
-Original Message-
From: Jim Jagielski
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 9:32 PM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: *** Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.4 as GA
So far, I just see one -1 from
On 21.02.2013 21:32, Jim Jagielski wrote:
So far, I just see one -1 from rjung due to the weird Solaris
bug he's hitting, but it also seems Sol10 specific. The
-deps bug appears more (only) an APR issue and not something
with httpd itself, so ... ;)
I see two issues on Solaris:
- PR 49504,
On 2/18/2013 12:34 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.4 can be found
at the usual place:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.4 GA.
NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make
On 20.02.2013 08:07, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On Wed, 20 Feb 2013 16:42:56 +1000
Noel Butler noel.but...@ausics.net wrote:
On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 23:31 -0600, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
Note he mentioned SHA512, not crypt(). I don't know that this makes
a difference on that
Should we be including/moving this discussion to dev@apr ?
On Feb 20, 2013, at 3:07 AM, Rainer Jung rainer.j...@kippdata.de wrote:
On 20.02.2013 08:07, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On Wed, 20 Feb 2013 16:42:56 +1000
Noel Butler noel.but...@ausics.net wrote:
On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 23:31 -0600,
On 20.02.2013 13:06, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Should we be including/moving this discussion to dev@apr ?
I guess so. Strong evidence that the problem sits in
apr_password_validate as part of apu 1.5.1.
Regards,
Rainer
On Feb 20, 2013, at 3:07 AM, Rainer Jung rainer.j...@kippdata.de wrote:
On
: gmane.comp.apache.devel
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.4 as GA
The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.4 can be found
at the usual place:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.4 GA.
NOTE: The -deps
On 19.02.2013 18:26, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Hmmm I'm not seeing crashes, ...
Concerning the crashes using prefork on Solaris 10. I have a
reproduction scenario, but I need to load lots of modules. But then the
stacks look very similar to the problem described in
+1: OSX 10.8.2, Fedora 16 and 18 (x86_64) and CentOS 6 (x86_64)
On Feb 18, 2013, at 3:34 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.4 can be found
at the usual place:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
I'm calling a VOTE on releasing
On Wed, 20 Feb 2013 12:58:07 -0500
Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
+1: OSX 10.8.2, Fedora 16 and 18 (x86_64) and CentOS 6 (x86_64)
So what is your thinking on the apr-util 1.5.1 crypt mess?
Should we re-roll 2.4.4 deps and either re-roll 2.2.24 with a
corrected roll-release script to
-deps for 2.4.4 are not released, so it's a non-issue for 2.4.x.
I can't recall if we bundle apr/apu with 2.2.x but if we do, then
I say simply rerolling with apu-1.4 instead of apu-1.5 is fine.
On Feb 20, 2013, at 1:10 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
On Wed, 20 Feb 2013
On Wed, 2013-02-20 at 01:07 -0600, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
Which remains my point... our current 2.4 and 2.2 candidates should
suffer the same flaw.
Confirmed, 2.2 candidate suffers same problem
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Wed, 2013-02-20 at 15:06 -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote:
-deps for 2.4.4 are not released, so it's a non-issue for 2.4.x.
I can't recall if we bundle apr/apu with 2.2.x but if we do, then
I ran a test for Bill to check if it suffers same fate, yes it is
included, and yes, it does.
I say
[moving to dev@apr, please remove dev@httpd when replying]
On Wednesday 20 February 2013, Noel Butler wrote:
On Wed, 2013-02-20 at 01:07 -0600, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
Which remains my point... our current 2.4 and 2.2 candidates
should suffer the same flaw.
Confirmed, 2.2 candidate
Hi Rainer,
On Wed, 2013-02-20 at 09:07 +0100, Rainer Jung wrote:
I prepared another round of patches t check, what's wrong in
apr_password_validate. All patches can be applied in srclib/apr-util.
They are *not* cumulative:
1) Undo one change in the password validation function and check
On Wed, 2013-02-20 at 22:28 +0100, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
[moving to dev@apr, please remove dev@httpd when replying]
On Wednesday 20 February 2013, Noel Butler wrote:
On Wed, 2013-02-20 at 01:07 -0600, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
Which remains my point... our current 2.4 and 2.2 candidates
On 02/18/2013 09:34 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.4 can be found
at the usual place:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.4 GA.
NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to
On 20.02.2013 22:33, Noel Butler wrote:
On Wed, 2013-02-20 at 09:07 +0100, Rainer Jung wrote:
2) Keep original validation code but ad some debug output to STDERR:
http://people.apache.org/~rjung/patches/apr-util-password_validate-debug.patch
On Wed, 2013-02-20 at 23:56 +0100, Rainer Jung wrote:
That's strange, the additional stderr output
crypt_r returned NULL
or
crypt_r returned '%s'
is not shown here.
Indeed, I'm running :
LogLevel debug auth_basic:trace8 authn_dbd:trace8
Briefly ran trace8 globally, but only
On 19.02.2013 04:35, Noel Butler wrote:
Builds fine but operation now fails on all mysql auths (included APR
problem from -deps ??)
reports: APR-util Version: 1.5.1
[Tue Feb 19 13:16:33.487932 2013] [auth_basic:error] [pid 24811:tid
2996689776] [client xxx] AH01617: user noel:
A simple check would be to rebuild 2.4.3 but using the -deps
from 2.4.4...
On Feb 19, 2013, at 2:57 AM, Noel Butler noel.but...@ausics.net wrote:
Hi Bill,
On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 23:23 -0600, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
in -deps is only 1.4.6, but APR-utils is 1.5.1
have tested
On 18.02.2013 21:34, Jim Jagielski wrote:
The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.4 can be found
at the usual place:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.4 GA.
NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make
Am 19.02.2013 18:03, schrieb Rainer Jung:
On 18.02.2013 21:34, Jim Jagielski wrote:
The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.4 can be found
at the usual place:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.4 GA.
NOTE: The -deps
Hmmm I'm not seeing crashes, but I'm seeing weird output
from server-status. When I do a graceful, all of a sudden
there are entries in 'Request' (OPTIONS * HTTP/1.0) when
there shouldn't be. This is with Prefork.
Looks like some scoreboard issue...
On Feb 19, 2013, at 12:03 PM, Rainer Jung
Never mind... this is expected. It's been awhile since I looked
at that codepath.
FWIW, not seeing crashes on any MPM yet on OSX.
On Feb 19, 2013, at 12:26 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
Hmmm I'm not seeing crashes, but I'm seeing weird output
from server-status. When I do a
On Feb 19, 2013, at 12:15 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
Am 19.02.2013 18:03, schrieb Rainer Jung:
Plattform is Solaris 10 Sparc. I would be interested in hearing if
anyone else can reproduce. Will try myself on Linux later
at least not on Fedora 18 with my custom
On 19.02.2013 18:40, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Never mind... this is expected. It's been awhile since I looked
at that codepath.
FWIW, not seeing crashes on any MPM yet on OSX.
And after a graceful restart with two listeners the old processes (apart
from the parent) are no longer in the process
On Feb 19, 2013, at 2:08 PM, Rainer Jung rainer.j...@kippdata.de wrote:
On 19.02.2013 18:40, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Never mind... this is expected. It's been awhile since I looked
at that codepath.
FWIW, not seeing crashes on any MPM yet on OSX.
And after a graceful restart with two
On 19.02.2013 19:25, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Feb 19, 2013, at 12:15 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
Am 19.02.2013 18:03, schrieb Rainer Jung:
Plattform is Solaris 10 Sparc. I would be interested in hearing if
anyone else can reproduce. Will try myself on Linux later
at
Here's what I see concerning the graceful restart problem on Solaris.
Setup using the prefork MPM with two http listeners. Accept mutex is
pthread.
Short version: child processes that do not manage to acquire the accept
mutex during graceful restart and before the next generation child
processes
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:05 PM, Rainer Jung rainer.j...@kippdata.de wrote:
Here's what I see concerning the graceful restart problem on Solaris.
Setup using the prefork MPM with two http listeners. Accept mutex is
pthread.
maybe https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49504 ?
On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 07:34 -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote:
A simple check would be to rebuild 2.4.3 but using the -deps
from 2.4.4...
Close... 2.4.3 with 2.4.4 -deps fail *but* 2.4.4 with
-deps from 2.4.3 *works*
So as I suspected it is something in 2.4.4. APR/ APR-util as
On 20.02.2013 01:05, Rainer Jung wrote:
Here's what I see concerning the graceful restart problem on Solaris.
Setup using the prefork MPM with two http listeners. Accept mutex is
pthread.
Short version: child processes that do not manage to acquire the accept
mutex during graceful restart
On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 12:03 +0100, Rainer Jung wrote:
LogLevel info auth_basic:trace8 authn_dbd:trace8
Thanks
I checked whether the patch compiles fine, but haven't tested it, so
careful if applying to production.
no problem this is only on dev at present.
NOTE: passwords returned in
On 20.02.2013 01:20, Eric Covener wrote:
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:05 PM, Rainer Jung rainer.j...@kippdata.de wrote:
Here's what I see concerning the graceful restart problem on Solaris.
Setup using the prefork MPM with two http listeners. Accept mutex is
pthread.
maybe
On Feb 19, 2013, at 7:21 PM, Noel Butler noel.but...@ausics.net wrote:
On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 07:34 -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote:
A simple check would be to rebuild 2.4.3 but using the -deps
from 2.4.4...
Close... 2.4.3 with 2.4.4 -deps fail *but* 2.4.4 with -deps
from
That is one ugly bug...
On Feb 19, 2013, at 7:50 PM, Rainer Jung rainer.j...@kippdata.de wrote:
On 20.02.2013 01:20, Eric Covener wrote:
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:05 PM, Rainer Jung rainer.j...@kippdata.de wrote:
Here's what I see concerning the graceful restart problem on Solaris.
Setup
On Feb 19, 2013, at 7:21 PM, Noel Butler noel.but...@ausics.net wrote:
On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 07:34 -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote:
A simple check would be to rebuild 2.4.3 but using the -deps
from 2.4.4...
Close... 2.4.3 with 2.4.4 -deps fail *but* 2.4.4 with -deps
from
On 20.02.2013 01:39, Noel Butler wrote:
On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 12:03 +0100, Rainer Jung wrote:
OK, so we know it is correctly retrieving the hash and the aces control
really fails in the apu password_validate.
Next: Could you please
grep CRYPT /path/to/build/apache/srclib/apr-util/config.status
On Wed, 2013-02-20 at 02:20 +0100, Rainer Jung wrote:
grep CRYPT build/apache/srclib/apr-util/config.status
D[HAVE_CRYPT_R]= 1
D[CRYPT_R_STRUCT_CRYPT_DATA]= 1
| I'd like to check, whether your platform has CRYPT_R_CRYPTD or
CRYPT_R_STRUCT_CRYPT_DATA defined. If it is the latter, then what OS
On Wed, 20 Feb 2013 02:20:55 +0100
Rainer Jung rainer.j...@kippdata.de wrote:
On 20.02.2013 01:39, Noel Butler wrote:
On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 12:03 +0100, Rainer Jung wrote:
OK, so we know it is correctly retrieving the hash and the aces
control really fails in the apu password_validate.
On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 23:31 -0600, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
Note he mentioned SHA512, not crypt(). I don't know that this makes
a difference on that architecture.
But isn't it just a hand off to system crypt() (modern crypt(), not the
ancient 8 char one), since httpd is limited in
On Wed, 20 Feb 2013 16:42:56 +1000
Noel Butler noel.but...@ausics.net wrote:
On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 23:31 -0600, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
Note he mentioned SHA512, not crypt(). I don't know that this makes
a difference on that architecture.
But isn't it just a hand off to
On Wed, 2013-02-20 at 01:07 -0600, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On Wed, 20 Feb 2013 16:42:56 +1000
Noel Butler noel.but...@ausics.net wrote:
On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 23:31 -0600, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
Note he mentioned SHA512, not crypt(). I don't know that this makes
a
The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.4 can be found
at the usual place:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.4 GA.
NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life
easier for the tester. They will not be,
On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 15:34 -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote:
The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.4 can be found
at the usual place:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.4 GA.
NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here
On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 13:35 +1000, Noel Butler wrote:
reports: APR-util Version: 1.5.1
I note the APR version in -deps is only 1.4.6, but APR-utils is 1.5.1
could this be the issue?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:11:59 +1000
Noel Butler noel.but...@ausics.net wrote:
On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 13:35 +1000, Noel Butler wrote:
reports: APR-util Version: 1.5.1
I note the APR version in -deps is only 1.4.6, but APR-utils is 1.5.1
could this be the issue?
No. APR doesn't care
Hi Bill,
On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 23:23 -0600, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
in -deps is only 1.4.6, but APR-utils is 1.5.1
have tested overwrites, and clearing of all bin/ build/ lib/ and fresh
installs no change.
You cleaned lib/ of all *subdirectories*?
I install httpd under
65 matches
Mail list logo
