On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Jeff Trawick <[email protected]> wrote: > 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
with a whitespace and comment fix that make it easier to compare 2.0.64+patch with 2.2.19+patch: http://people.apache.org/~trawick/draft2-2.0.64-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... > -- Born in Roswell... married an alien...
