Re: Core Vote (Re: mod_python 3.2.9 available for testing)
Nicolas Lehuen wrote .. > Note that the problem with Apache 2.2 on Windows XP SP2 seems to have > disappeared, though I can't see how this is possible, unless Graham fixed > something :). > > The problem was more probably due to an Apache 2.2 setup glitch. Not necessarily a glitch. The whole problem with the registration of server cleanup functions was that whether it would cause a problem/hang/crash was random. It just depended on what the Apache child process was doing at the time the signal came from the parent process to shut it down. In some respects the Win32 platform would have fared a bit better than UNIX as on Win32 a signal handler is actually executed as a distinct thread where as on UNIX it just suspends all running code and then blindly executes the signal handler code. We still need to disable the server cleanup execution, it just has too much potential for problems. Graham > Regards, > Nicolas > > 2006/7/31, Jim Gallacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > We decided to fix the memory leak in parse_qsl and move on to 3.2.10, > > which has been tested and currently has +3 core votes. All we need now > > is the official release. One of these days I'll sort out my GPG keys > so > > I can sign these things myself but in the mean time we'll need your > > help, Grisha. > > > > Main 3.2.10 feature is Apache 2.2 support, plus bug fixes. > > > > Tarball and Win binaries are here: > > > > http://people.apache.org/~jgallacher/mod_python/dist/ > > http://nicolas.lehuen.com/download/mod_python/ > > > > Jim > > > > Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote: > > > > > > Sorry for the late response - I was trying to have a "vacation" - that's > > > when you are geographically in a different place with slow internet > > > access and read only "some" of your e-mail ;-) > > > > > > +1 for core vote (with the note about the 2.2.2 XP SP2 issue). > > > > > > Grisha > > > > > > On Sat, 8 Jul 2006, Graham Dumpleton wrote: > > > > > >> > > >> On 08/07/2006, at 4:26 AM, Jim Gallacher wrote: > > >> > > >>> Hi Grisha, > > >>> > > >>> Here is the tally: > > >>> > > >>> +1 FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE-p2, Apache 2.2 (mpm-prefork), Python 2.4.3 > > >>> +1 Linux Debian Sid, Apache 2.0.55 (mpm-worker), Python 2.3.5 > > >>> +1 Linux Debian Sid, Apache 2.2.0 (mpm-worker), Python 2.4.2 > > >>> +1 Linux Fedora Core 5 (i386), Apache 2.2.0 (mpm-prefork), Python > > 2.4.3 > > >>> +1 Linux Slackware 10.2, Apache 2.0.55 (mpm-prefork), Python 2.4.1 > > >>> +1 Linux Ubuntu 6.06, Apache 2.0.55 (mpm-worker), Python 2.4.3 > > >>> +1 MacOSX 10.4.6 PPC, Apache-2.0.55 (mpm/worker), Python-2.3.5 > > >>> +1 MacOSX 10.4.6 PPC, Apache-2.2.1 (mpm/worker), Python-2.3.5 > > >>> +1 MacOSX 10.4.7 Intel, Apache-2.0.55 (mpm/prefork), Python-2.4.2 > > >>> +1 Windows XP SP2, Apache 2.0.58 (mpm_winnt), Python 2.4.3 > > >>> > > >>> -1 Windows XP SP2, Apache 2.2.2 (mpm_winnt), Python 2.4.3 > > >>> > > >>> The -1 was from Nicolas, with the following comment: > > >>> "Only two tests fail but with a segfault, it's > > test_srv_register_cleanup > > >>> and test_apache_register_cleanup. This is not really surprising... > I > > >>> think we should go ahead and release the 3.2.9 version, while filing > a > > >>> known bug regarding the fact that we drop the support for those two > > >>> functions. If we accept this, then it's a +1. > > >> > > >> The issue with server cleanups failing and why is covered by: > > >> > > >> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON-109 > > >> > > >>> The last test results were submitted July 1, so I think we may as > well > > >>> have a core vote. > > >>> > > >>> Jim > > >>> > > >>> Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote: > > > > I'm barely keeping my head above water right now with work, so not > > really following the list - if someone could please ping me when/if > > you > > think we're ready for the core group vote and we have a tally. > > > > Thanks! > > > > Grisha > > > > -- Forwarded message -- > > Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2006 23:18:05 -0400 > > From: Jorey Bump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: python-dev@httpd.apache.org > > Subject: Re: mod_python 3.2.9 available for testing > > > > +1 Linux Slackware 10.2, Apache 2.0.55 (mpm-prefork), Python 2.4.1 > > > > Jim Gallacher wrote: > > > The mod_python 3.2.9 tarball is available for testing. > > > > > > This tarball is unchanged from 3.2.9-rc3, but should be retested > > > anyway > > > - just in case something went pair-shaped in the process of tagging > > > and > > > packaging. > > > > > > Here are the rules: > > > > > > In order for a file to be officially announced, it has to be tested > > by > > > developers on the dev list. Anyone subscribed to this list can > (and > > > should feel obligated to :-) ) test it, and provide feedback *to > > > _this_ > > > list*! (Not the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list, and preferably > not > > me > > > per
Re: Core Vote (Re: mod_python 3.2.9 available for testing)
Note that the problem with Apache 2.2 on Windows XP SP2 seems to have disappeared, though I can't see how this is possible, unless Graham fixed something :).The problem was more probably due to an Apache 2.2 setup glitch. Regards,Nicolas2006/7/31, Jim Gallacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: We decided to fix the memory leak in parse_qsl and move on to 3.2.10,which has been tested and currently has +3 core votes. All we need nowis the official release. One of these days I'll sort out my GPG keys so I can sign these things myself but in the mean time we'll need yourhelp, Grisha.Main 3.2.10 feature is Apache 2.2 support, plus bug fixes.Tarball and Win binaries are here: http://people.apache.org/~jgallacher/mod_python/dist/http://nicolas.lehuen.com/download/mod_python/JimGregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote: >> Sorry for the late response - I was trying to have a "vacation" - that's> when you are geographically in a different place with slow internet> access and read only "some" of your e-mail ;-) >> +1 for core vote (with the note about the 2.2.2 XP SP2 issue).>> Grisha>> On Sat, 8 Jul 2006, Graham Dumpleton wrote:> On 08/07/2006, at 4:26 AM, Jim Gallacher wrote: > Hi Grisha,>> Here is the tally:>> +1 FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE-p2, Apache 2.2 (mpm-prefork), Python 2.4.3>>> +1 Linux Debian Sid, Apache 2.0.55 (mpm-worker), Python 2.3.5>>> +1 Linux Debian Sid, Apache 2.2.0 (mpm-worker), Python 2.4.2>>> +1 Linux Fedora Core 5 (i386), Apache 2.2.0 (mpm-prefork), Python 2.4.3>>> +1 Linux Slackware 10.2, Apache 2.0.55 (mpm-prefork), Python 2.4.1>>> +1 Linux Ubuntu 6.06, Apache 2.0.55 (mpm-worker), Python 2.4.3>>> +1 MacOSX 10.4.6 PPC, Apache-2.0.55 (mpm/worker), Python-2.3.5>>> +1 MacOSX 10.4.6 PPC, Apache-2.2.1 (mpm/worker), Python-2.3.5>>> +1 MacOSX 10.4.7 Intel, Apache-2.0.55 (mpm/prefork), Python-2.4.2>>> +1 Windows XP SP2, Apache 2.0.58 (mpm_winnt), Python 2.4.3>>> >>> -1 Windows XP SP2, Apache 2.2.2 (mpm_winnt), Python 2.4.3>> The -1 was from Nicolas, with the following comment:>>> "Only two tests fail but with a segfault, it's test_srv_register_cleanup >>> and test_apache_register_cleanup. This is not really surprising... I>>> think we should go ahead and release the 3.2.9 version, while filing a>>> known bug regarding the fact that we drop the support for those two >>> functions. If we accept this, then it's a +1. The issue with server cleanups failing and why is covered by: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON-109> The last test results were submitted July 1, so I think we may as well>>> have a core vote.>> Jim >> Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote: I'm barely keeping my head above water right now with work, so not really following the list - if someone could please ping me when/if you think we're ready for the core group vote and we have a tally. Thanks! Grisha -- Forwarded message -- Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2006 23:18:05 -0400 From: Jorey Bump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: python-dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: Re: mod_python 3.2.9 available for testing +1 Linux Slackware 10.2, Apache 2.0.55 (mpm-prefork), Python 2.4.1 Jim Gallacher wrote:> The mod_python 3.2.9 tarball is available for testing.>> This tarball is unchanged from 3.2.9-rc3, but should be retested > anyway> - just in case something went pair-shaped in the process of tagging> and> packaging.>> Here are the rules: >> In order for a file to be officially announced, it has to be tested by> developers on the dev list. Anyone subscribed to this list can (and> should feel obligated to :-) ) test it, and provide feedback *to > _this_> list*! (Not the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list, and preferably not me> personally).> > The files are (temporarily) available here:>> http://people.apache.org/~jgallacher/mod_python/dist/ > http://people.apache.org/~jgallacher/mod_python/dist/> mod_python-3.2.9.tgz> http://people.apache.org/~jgallacher/mod_python/dist/> mod_python-3.2.9.tgz.md5>>> Please download it, then do the usual> > $ ./configure --with-apxs=/wherever/it/is> $ make> $ (su)> # make install>> Then (as non-root user!) >> $ cd test> $ python test.py>> And see if any tests fail. If they pass, send a +1 to the list, if> they > fail, send the details (the versions of OS, Apache, Apache-mpm,> Python,> the test output, and suggestions, if any).>> Please present your test results in the following format: > +1 OS version, Apache version (apache mpm), Python Version>> For example:> +1 Linux Debian Sid, Apache 2.0.55 (mpm-worker), Python 2.3.5>> Presenting your information in a consistent format will help in> tabulating the results. You can include additional information in each> section, just don't use extra commas. There is no need to include
Re: Core Vote (Re: mod_python 3.2.9 available for testing)
We decided to fix the memory leak in parse_qsl and move on to 3.2.10, which has been tested and currently has +3 core votes. All we need now is the official release. One of these days I'll sort out my GPG keys so I can sign these things myself but in the mean time we'll need your help, Grisha. Main 3.2.10 feature is Apache 2.2 support, plus bug fixes. Tarball and Win binaries are here: http://people.apache.org/~jgallacher/mod_python/dist/ http://nicolas.lehuen.com/download/mod_python/ Jim Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote: > > Sorry for the late response - I was trying to have a "vacation" - that's > when you are geographically in a different place with slow internet > access and read only "some" of your e-mail ;-) > > +1 for core vote (with the note about the 2.2.2 XP SP2 issue). > > Grisha > > On Sat, 8 Jul 2006, Graham Dumpleton wrote: > >> >> On 08/07/2006, at 4:26 AM, Jim Gallacher wrote: >> >>> Hi Grisha, >>> >>> Here is the tally: >>> >>> +1 FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE-p2, Apache 2.2 (mpm-prefork), Python 2.4.3 >>> +1 Linux Debian Sid, Apache 2.0.55 (mpm-worker), Python 2.3.5 >>> +1 Linux Debian Sid, Apache 2.2.0 (mpm-worker), Python 2.4.2 >>> +1 Linux Fedora Core 5 (i386), Apache 2.2.0 (mpm-prefork), Python 2.4.3 >>> +1 Linux Slackware 10.2, Apache 2.0.55 (mpm-prefork), Python 2.4.1 >>> +1 Linux Ubuntu 6.06, Apache 2.0.55 (mpm-worker), Python 2.4.3 >>> +1 MacOSX 10.4.6 PPC, Apache-2.0.55 (mpm/worker), Python-2.3.5 >>> +1 MacOSX 10.4.6 PPC, Apache-2.2.1 (mpm/worker), Python-2.3.5 >>> +1 MacOSX 10.4.7 Intel, Apache-2.0.55 (mpm/prefork), Python-2.4.2 >>> +1 Windows XP SP2, Apache 2.0.58 (mpm_winnt), Python 2.4.3 >>> >>> -1 Windows XP SP2, Apache 2.2.2 (mpm_winnt), Python 2.4.3 >>> >>> The -1 was from Nicolas, with the following comment: >>> "Only two tests fail but with a segfault, it's test_srv_register_cleanup >>> and test_apache_register_cleanup. This is not really surprising... I >>> think we should go ahead and release the 3.2.9 version, while filing a >>> known bug regarding the fact that we drop the support for those two >>> functions. If we accept this, then it's a +1. >> >> The issue with server cleanups failing and why is covered by: >> >> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON-109 >> >>> The last test results were submitted July 1, so I think we may as well >>> have a core vote. >>> >>> Jim >>> >>> Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote: I'm barely keeping my head above water right now with work, so not really following the list - if someone could please ping me when/if you think we're ready for the core group vote and we have a tally. Thanks! Grisha -- Forwarded message -- Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2006 23:18:05 -0400 From: Jorey Bump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: python-dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: Re: mod_python 3.2.9 available for testing +1 Linux Slackware 10.2, Apache 2.0.55 (mpm-prefork), Python 2.4.1 Jim Gallacher wrote: > The mod_python 3.2.9 tarball is available for testing. > > This tarball is unchanged from 3.2.9-rc3, but should be retested > anyway > - just in case something went pair-shaped in the process of tagging > and > packaging. > > Here are the rules: > > In order for a file to be officially announced, it has to be tested by > developers on the dev list. Anyone subscribed to this list can (and > should feel obligated to :-) ) test it, and provide feedback *to > _this_ > list*! (Not the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list, and preferably not me > personally). > > The files are (temporarily) available here: > > http://people.apache.org/~jgallacher/mod_python/dist/ > http://people.apache.org/~jgallacher/mod_python/dist/ > mod_python-3.2.9.tgz > http://people.apache.org/~jgallacher/mod_python/dist/ > mod_python-3.2.9.tgz.md5 > > > Please download it, then do the usual > > $ ./configure --with-apxs=/wherever/it/is > $ make > $ (su) > # make install > > Then (as non-root user!) > > $ cd test > $ python test.py > > And see if any tests fail. If they pass, send a +1 to the list, if > they > fail, send the details (the versions of OS, Apache, Apache-mpm, > Python, > the test output, and suggestions, if any). > > Please present your test results in the following format: > +1 OS version, Apache version (apache mpm), Python Version > > For example: > +1 Linux Debian Sid, Apache 2.0.55 (mpm-worker), Python 2.3.5 > > Presenting your information in a consistent format will help in > tabulating the results. You can include additional information in each > section, just don't use extra commas. There is no need to include the > mod_python version in this string as that information is available in > the email subject. Who knows, one day I may actually write a script to > extract
Core Vote (Re: mod_python 3.2.9 available for testing)
Sorry for the late response - I was trying to have a "vacation" - that's when you are geographically in a different place with slow internet access and read only "some" of your e-mail ;-) +1 for core vote (with the note about the 2.2.2 XP SP2 issue). Grisha On Sat, 8 Jul 2006, Graham Dumpleton wrote: On 08/07/2006, at 4:26 AM, Jim Gallacher wrote: Hi Grisha, Here is the tally: +1 FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE-p2, Apache 2.2 (mpm-prefork), Python 2.4.3 +1 Linux Debian Sid, Apache 2.0.55 (mpm-worker), Python 2.3.5 +1 Linux Debian Sid, Apache 2.2.0 (mpm-worker), Python 2.4.2 +1 Linux Fedora Core 5 (i386), Apache 2.2.0 (mpm-prefork), Python 2.4.3 +1 Linux Slackware 10.2, Apache 2.0.55 (mpm-prefork), Python 2.4.1 +1 Linux Ubuntu 6.06, Apache 2.0.55 (mpm-worker), Python 2.4.3 +1 MacOSX 10.4.6 PPC, Apache-2.0.55 (mpm/worker), Python-2.3.5 +1 MacOSX 10.4.6 PPC, Apache-2.2.1 (mpm/worker), Python-2.3.5 +1 MacOSX 10.4.7 Intel, Apache-2.0.55 (mpm/prefork), Python-2.4.2 +1 Windows XP SP2, Apache 2.0.58 (mpm_winnt), Python 2.4.3 -1 Windows XP SP2, Apache 2.2.2 (mpm_winnt), Python 2.4.3 The -1 was from Nicolas, with the following comment: "Only two tests fail but with a segfault, it's test_srv_register_cleanup and test_apache_register_cleanup. This is not really surprising... I think we should go ahead and release the 3.2.9 version, while filing a known bug regarding the fact that we drop the support for those two functions. If we accept this, then it's a +1. The issue with server cleanups failing and why is covered by: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON-109 The last test results were submitted July 1, so I think we may as well have a core vote. Jim Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote: I'm barely keeping my head above water right now with work, so not really following the list - if someone could please ping me when/if you think we're ready for the core group vote and we have a tally. Thanks! Grisha -- Forwarded message -- Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2006 23:18:05 -0400 From: Jorey Bump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: python-dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: Re: mod_python 3.2.9 available for testing +1 Linux Slackware 10.2, Apache 2.0.55 (mpm-prefork), Python 2.4.1 Jim Gallacher wrote: The mod_python 3.2.9 tarball is available for testing. This tarball is unchanged from 3.2.9-rc3, but should be retested anyway - just in case something went pair-shaped in the process of tagging and packaging. Here are the rules: In order for a file to be officially announced, it has to be tested by developers on the dev list. Anyone subscribed to this list can (and should feel obligated to :-) ) test it, and provide feedback *to _this_ list*! (Not the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list, and preferably not me personally). The files are (temporarily) available here: http://people.apache.org/~jgallacher/mod_python/dist/ http://people.apache.org/~jgallacher/mod_python/dist/ mod_python-3.2.9.tgz http://people.apache.org/~jgallacher/mod_python/dist/ mod_python-3.2.9.tgz.md5 Please download it, then do the usual $ ./configure --with-apxs=/wherever/it/is $ make $ (su) # make install Then (as non-root user!) $ cd test $ python test.py And see if any tests fail. If they pass, send a +1 to the list, if they fail, send the details (the versions of OS, Apache, Apache-mpm, Python, the test output, and suggestions, if any). Please present your test results in the following format: +1 OS version, Apache version (apache mpm), Python Version For example: +1 Linux Debian Sid, Apache 2.0.55 (mpm-worker), Python 2.3.5 Presenting your information in a consistent format will help in tabulating the results. You can include additional information in each section, just don't use extra commas. There is no need to include the mod_python version in this string as that information is available in the email subject. Who knows, one day I may actually write a script to extract this information automatically. :) Thank you for your assistance, Jim Gallacher
