[In order for any reply to be added to the PR database, ]
[you need to include <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in the Cc line ]
[and leave the subject line UNCHANGED.  This is not done]
[automatically because of the potential for mail loops. ]


Synopsis: Images being served in an inconsistant manor

State-Changed-From-To: feedback-closed
State-Changed-By: coar
State-Changed-When: Sun May 24 08:06:33 PDT 1998
State-Changed-Why:
[There's a reason we ask that you Cc the <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
address.. so your reply will get attached to the report.]

The 200 status indicates that the server successfully
sent all of the information (or thinks it did).  How does
the transaction size compare to the actualy byte-count of
the image?

Well, if the problem doesn't occur with 1.3b6, then the
cause appears to have been fixed.  (BTW, are there any
common features among the problem images?  Such as,
are they all GIF89A interlaced, and JPEGs always work?
Or anything like that?)

I realise that running beta software can be scary, but
1.3.0 is fairly close to release.  In addition, a lot
of very high profile sites use the latest beta, so I
wouldn't be *too* concerned.  I think that 1.3.0 will be
out with its fix before the fix is determined and added
to 1.2, so I suggest that you hang on a little longer -
a matter of weeks only.  Whether you stay with 1.2 and
the known bug of broken images, or stay on 1.3b6 with
its beta status, fix for the image issue, and potential
other unknown bugs.. well, you need to make the call.  I'd
suggest the latter, though, personally.  Thanks for using
Apache!

Reply via email to