On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 3:16 PM, Jeff Trawick <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 3:08 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. <[email protected]> > wrote: >> On 9/8/2011 1:45 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote: >>>> >>>> On the 2.0 side, nothings changed since 2.0.55 that should break the patch. >>> >>> BTW, do any of us have an updated 2.0 patch to reflect the important >>> changes since last weekend? If not, I'll need to work on thatin the >>> short term. >> >> I'm happy to help late this afternoon once I've worked out a wholly >> unrelated fix, and 2.2.x looks ready to tag. If you wanted sooner, >> please feel free to jump ahead of me. > > I'm starting that now. Hopefully I can make some progress (or finish) > before I have to switch gears in an hour or so.
This probably fails due to my context switching, but it is a start :) http://people.apache.org/~trawick/draft-2.0.64-byterange-fixes.txt This needs some check for epic fail... /* simple version for consistency with 2.2 code which uses * apr_strtoff() * * Base is always 10, leading whitespace and signs not allowed, * per restrictions in the caller. */ static apr_status_t base10_strtoff(apr_off_t *offset, const char *buf, char **endptr) { const char *last; *offset = apr_atoi64(buf); last = buf; while (isdigit(*last)) { ++last; } *endptr = (char *)last; if (last == buf) { return APR_EINVAL; } return APR_SUCCESS; } -- Born in Roswell... married an alien...
