On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 7:35 PM, Eric Covener <cove...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:12 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
> wrote:
>> I'm wondering if there is anyone interested in a regression-fix-only 2.4.26
>> that
>> finally proves to be a workable upgrade for all httpd users?
>
> It sounds reasonable to me, but I think it's a bit of an oversell --
> It's just going to be a little bit of stabilization.
>
> AFAICT so far there is:
>
> One 2.4.25 regression committed:
>
> *) mod_proxy_{ajp,fcgi}: Fix a possible crash when reusing an established
> backend connection, happening with LogLevel trace2 or higher configured,
> or at any log level with compilers not detected as C99 compliant (e.g.
> MSVC on Windows). [Yann Ylavic]
>
> One older regression listed as a showstopper:
>
> *) PR 60576: 2.4.21 broke PHP-FPM with the patch to strip the bogus
> "proxy://"
> prefix from SCRIPT_FILENAME. We need to revert to the previous behavior
> ASAP to avoid any further hurdles with FCGI implementations while we
> figure
> this out.
>
> And a fix for an old bug that missed being backported until a bugzilla review:
>
> *) mod_proxy_fcgi, mod_fcgid: Fix crashes in ap_fcgi_encoded_env_len() when
> modules add empty environment variables to the request. PR60275.
> [<alex2grad AT gmail.com>]
>
> Is there anything else we should list as a showstopper?
That is my underlying question; what else qualifies?
Win32 build fix of mod_status is already in 2.4.x branch two hours following
the 2.4.25 re-tag, so that also is resolved.
Yann's proposal to accept the newly-prohibited obs-fold that we approved into
2.2.32 would also seem to qualify.
So far, I haven't heard from an httpd committer who is actually interested in
our shipping such a release. I'd be happy to tag and roll, but this is more so
a poll whether there is interest in having non-enhancement 2.4.x releases
by the PMC/committer core, or whether there is a desire for a fork for users
who are not PMC members but are actively interested in pursuing a "stable"
build.
Cheers,
Bill
