I am a typical Windows user and not a developer. Yes I can build with VC and
can do little adjustments in C++
Sorry I cannot give more info, it is just not working with no signs in the
Apache logs.
As I told, the authors are looking at it, had to wait when they have more
info.
Maybe I am thinking to simple, 2.2.6 contains some backports over 2.2.5 so a
big change that one of lines in the change log must cause this.
Oh btw, we/I do not hate ASF at all, we Windows users sometimes crying for a
little more attention. This is the main reason that the Apache Lounge is
started.
Can we stop now this discussion ?
Steffen
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Jagielski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, 06 September, 2007 22:20
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache 2.2.6, 2.0.61 and 1.3.39 release candidate
tarballs for review
Ummm hrmm:
"A hurry backport is causing this and there is hardly
tested in real live. Hopefully ASF comes with a patch soon. "
So you know what's causing this? Please point out the exact
"hurry backport" so we can look there.
And again, WHAT OTHER 3rd party modules are having problems??
Can you provide ANY FURTHER information other than cryptic "its
not working" messages followed by "ASF hates Windows users"
comments??
If we *knew* what the problems were, we'd try like heck to fix
'em. I know Bill looked hard and long, but had no luck,
mostly because the amount of real concrete data was woefully
lacking.
On Sep 6, 2007, at 4:08 PM, Steffen wrote:
Better we stop this thread.
See the post at: http://www.apachelounge.com/forum/viewtopic.php? p=8691
, please do not reply to that post.
Steffen
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Jagielski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, 06 September, 2007 21:47
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache 2.2.6, 2.0.61 and 1.3.39 release candidate
tarballs for review
On Sep 6, 2007, at 3:25 PM, Steffen wrote:
I'm assuming the "we" is you, right?
It is not just me. We are a team and of course the users. Just as an
example
the other post from me here which is a report from an other
webmaster. I
report here test results from the Apache Windows Community from the
Apache
Lounge, mostly I receive them by mail.
You said that "we" need to:
"advise the users not to use 2.2.6 because is not compatible with
some mods"
which, afaik, is not the case. You reported issues with mod_fcgid,
which
may be true, but that hasn't been confirmed by anyone else, nor do
I see reports to support the "some mods" statement as well.
Unless, of course, the cryptic phrase "An other report"
actually means "The below is a report from someone else
who is also seeing an issue" instead of "Oh, by the way, I
also tried this personally and I see that mod_cgi is working OK
for me..."...
With all this being the case, I can't see holding up a release nor
can I see us ("us" being the ASF) making some blanket statement that
Win32 users should not use 2.2.6 because it is not compatible with
some mods... If we had some more supporting data for that, then
maybe...
Maybe we have to patch 2.2.6 to get it error-free.
Well, there is the patches directory that, if we discover
a bug, allows people to download the patch and rebuild. Of
course, this all means tracking down and discovering the
bug with some detailed debugging info rather than a "it
doesn't work" :)
