> -----Original Message----- > From: Joe Orton [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Mittwoch, 31. August 2011 11:13 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Regression with range fix > > On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 08:51:55PM +0200, Stefan Fritsch wrote: > > The first regression report, though slightly too late for the vote: > > > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=639825 > > > > The byterange_filter.c in the Debian update is exactly the one from > > 2.2.20. I will keep you updated. > > Hi; I'm just back from holiday and catching up. > > The behaviour changes in the patch which could feasibly break > non-compliant clients are: > > a) using 200 in some cases where a 206 response would end up being > larger > > b) using a chunked response where previously C-L was always used, in > cases where >=32 ranges are being returned > > Anything else to watch out for? > > Looking at the patch in 2.2.x; there is a lot of effort expended > deadling with apr_bucket_split() returning ENOTIMPL - that looks > unnecessary; the filter will only handle brigades containing buckets > with known length, and all such buckets "must" be _split-able.
So you think we can rip out the whole if (rv == APR_ENOTIMPL) blocks? Regards Rüdiger
