[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I try to improve my Apache code style awareness. What is wrong with the
formatting?
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/styleguide.html
The basic objection to your patch would be that statements after
your if's; put them on the next line.
HTH,
Sander
Regards
Rüdiger
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Except for the formatting +1 :)
On Sep 29, 2005, at 12:01 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What about the following patch? I think it should address all the things
discussed.
Regards
Rüdiger
Index: mod_proxy.c
===================================================================
--- mod_proxy.c (Revision 280422)
+++ mod_proxy.c (Arbeitskopie)
@@ -679,8 +679,20 @@
char *url = uri;
/* Try to obtain the most suitable worker */
access_status = ap_proxy_pre_request(&worker, &balancer, r,
conf, &url);
- if (access_status != OK)
- return access_status;
+ if (access_status != OK) {
+ /*
+ * Only return if access_status is not
HTTP_SERVICE_UNAVAILABLE
+ * This gives other modules the chance to hook into the
+ * request_status hook and decide what to do in this
situation.
+ */
+ if (access_status != HTTP_SERVICE_UNAVAILABLE) return
access_status;
+ /*
+ * Ensure that balancer is NULL if worker is NULL to
prevent
+ * potential problems in the post_request hook.
+ */
+ if (!worker) balancer = NULL;
+ goto cleanup;
+ }
if (balancer && balancer->max_attempts_set && !max_attempts)
max_attempts = balancer->max_attempts;
/* firstly, try a proxy, unless a NoProxy directive is
active */
