Re: Volunteers to drive an MSI build
Is there a document to install on Windows from source? I'd like to run through it and create and msi and try to automate the process. -Will - Original Message - From: "Gregg Smith" To: Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 3:21 PM Subject: Re: Volunteers to drive an MSI build On 11/16/2012 12:08 PM, Gregg Smith wrote: On 11/14/2012 3:56 AM, Guenter Knauf wrote: Am 14.11.2012 12:53, schrieb Guenter Knauf: I know that Gregg has 'something' which is not MSI but an EXE installer, but it works, and I asked already a while back if we should push this out, but there was no further interest / agreement here :-( The 'something' is Inno Setup. 'works' is relative to as much is completed so far. Another 'something' is NSIS (Nullsoft) which has been picked up by others and is over at sourceforge. I used to use it a long time ago but had to give it up for Inno Setup because it was dropped by the original author. A nice thing about it is the use and availability of plugins to do a lot of things even Inno cannot do. It's probably not as sharp a learning curve as WIX. Of course, it would mean starting from scratch. I will take inventory on this Inno Setup scripts and see what is left to do here in a day or two. Gregg
RE: Visual C++ 6 Processor Pack
You can download VS C++ express (http://www.microsoft.com/visualstudio/eng/products/visual-studio-express-products) Hope this helps Claudio > -Original Message- > From: apache-ad...@ultra-it.de [mailto:apache-ad...@ultra-it.de] > Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 1:23 PM > To: dev@httpd.apache.org > Subject: Visual C++ 6 Processor Pack > > Hello, > > I want to build the new version 2.2.23 of the Apache HTTPD on myself to > get involved in the debugging of the http server. > > Unfortunately I was not able to find the Visual C++ 6.0 Processor Pack at > microsofts download center nor on the web. > > Could you please tell me, who is building the windows binaries and could > give me that visual c++ extension. > > Would be great, if you could help me. > > Thanks a lot. > > apache-admin > >
Re: Volunteers to drive an MSI build
Le 16/11/2012 21:21, Gregg Smith a écrit : Another 'something' is NSIS (Nullsoft) which has been picked up by others and is over at sourceforge. I used to use it a long time ago but had to give it up for Inno Setup because it was dropped by the original author. A nice thing about it is the use and availability of plugins to do a lot of things even Inno cannot do. It's probably not as sharp a learning curve as WIX. Of course, it would mean starting from scratch. I will take inventory on this Inno Setup scripts and see what is left to do here in a day or two. Gregg I also use Inno Setup (and NSIS in the past) at work. I could try to give some help from time to time if needed. We also chose Inno Setup because it was more actively developed and maintained. Both can only, AFAIK, build .exe files and not .msi. CJ
Visual C++ 6 Processor Pack
Hello, I want to build the new version 2.2.23 of the Apache HTTPD on myself to get involved in the debugging of the http server. Unfortunately I was not able to find the Visual C++ 6.0 Processor Pack at microsofts download center nor on the web. Could you please tell me, who is building the windows binaries and could give me that visual c++ extension. Would be great, if you could help me. Thanks a lot. apache-admin
Re: Volunteers to drive an MSI build
On 11/16/2012 12:08 PM, Gregg Smith wrote: On 11/14/2012 3:56 AM, Guenter Knauf wrote: Am 14.11.2012 12:53, schrieb Guenter Knauf: I know that Gregg has 'something' which is not MSI but an EXE installer, but it works, and I asked already a while back if we should push this out, but there was no further interest / agreement here :-( The 'something' is Inno Setup. 'works' is relative to as much is completed so far. Another 'something' is NSIS (Nullsoft) which has been picked up by others and is over at sourceforge. I used to use it a long time ago but had to give it up for Inno Setup because it was dropped by the original author. A nice thing about it is the use and availability of plugins to do a lot of things even Inno cannot do. It's probably not as sharp a learning curve as WIX. Of course, it would mean starting from scratch. I will take inventory on this Inno Setup scripts and see what is left to do here in a day or two. Gregg
Re: Volunteers to drive an MSI build
On 11/14/2012 3:56 AM, Guenter Knauf wrote: Am 14.11.2012 12:53, schrieb Guenter Knauf: I know that Gregg has 'something' which is not MSI but an EXE installer, but it works, and I asked already a while back if we should push this out, but there was no further interest / agreement here :-( Gregg, can you perhaps put up at p.a.o what you have so far so that others can take a look and test? oh, and please also post a summarize of what we discussed about default location (system drive root vs 'Program Files') because of the right issues with Vista and up ... The 'something' is Inno Setup. 'works' is relative to as much is completed so far. I had to put this on hold for a few weeks for real life. I should get back to working on it soon. http://people.apache.org/~gsmith/httpd/installer/ Program Files vs. drive root PF pros everything in there is protected from users other than admin PF cons everything in there is protected from users other than admin which In Vista/7/8 the administrator account is disabled but you can run things as admin if your user has admin privileges. mostly causes problems with configuring and seeing any changes in htdocs (because they really go to the virtual store) pid file and logs cannot be written in some cases. Drive Root cons/pros depending on the use case nothing in there is protected from users other than admin anyone can configure anyone can modify htdocs anyone can start apache at the console (unless mod_auth_digest or mod_slotmem_shm are loaded [only tested in Vista]) the Apache service can run as a user other than SYSTEM (which allows Apache to use file shares) and Apache can be locked down to only read, read/write in certain areas of the hard drive (jailed) That's the quickest summary I can give on that. Gregg
Re: svn commit: r1406719 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk: CHANGES docs/log-message-tags/next-number include/http_core.h server/core.c server/protocol.c
On Nov 8, 2012, at 2:39 AM, Stefan Fritsch wrote: > On Wed, 7 Nov 2012, Graham Leggett wrote: > >> On 07 Nov 2012, at 8:12 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote: >> >>> Any suggestions for a syntax? Maybe: >>> >>> HttpProtocol 1.1# only 1.1 >>> HttpProtocol 1.0- # 1.0 and above >>> HttpProtocol 1.0-1.1# 1.0 and 1.1 >>> HttpProtocol -1.0 # 1.0 and below >>> >>> We could then still add additional flags like +/- strict. >> >> The "-" in front of something means "switch this off" in other directives, I >> suspect it might cause confusion. > > I have already used a similar syntax in RequestReadTimeout. But do you think > it would be clearer to require two numbers: > > HttpProtocol 0.0-1.0 # 1.0 and below > HttpProtocol 1.0-10.100 # 1.0 and above > > The upper limit would be rather arbitrary. Of course, I don't see HTTP/2.x > arriving any time soon. > >> Would it make sense to try use globbing (apr_fnmatch)? Perhaps multiple >> options separated by commas, or an ITERATE separated by spaces? >> >> HttpProtocol * # any version >> HttpProtocol 1.1 # only 1.1 >> HttpProtocol 1.* # 1.0 and above >> HttpProtocol 1.0,1.1 # 1.0 and 1.1 >> HttpProtocol 0.*,1.0 # 1.0 and below > > A list of allowed versions would be somewhat more complex to implement, > because it would require space in core_server_config to store a list (e.g. > with an apr_array) and we would need to iterate that list when checking the > request. Only having a minimum and maximum value seems like a less > over-engineered solution. > > Alternatively, if we use a list, then we could limit ourselves to the three > versions actually in use and not support arbitrary values. Not sure if that > is a future-proof solution. > >> RFC2616 defines the version as follows: >> >> HTTP-Version = "HTTP" "/" 1*DIGIT "." 1*DIGIT >> >> We could potentially also add a check to make sure that "DIGIT" part is >> checked to be actual digits, and reject it otherwise. > > In the received request? Yes, I think I had that one on my list already. FWIW, I don't think any of this should be configurable. HTTP/0.9 is on the chopping block -- it cannot be reasonably supported on networks today because routing is based on the Host header field. We should just delete all backasswards. HTTP/1.x must be supported to be 1.1 compliant and there is no point in allowing configuration of support for future protocols when we have nothing capable of processing those protocols. Only new protocol modules can determine what else is supported. Roy
default build httpd-2.4 and loadmodule/shm
It's always annoying after building an httpd-2.4 to see the AH01177 error message when doing a quick start-check with "apachectl start": [Fri Nov 16 16:29:19.093450 2012] [proxy_balancer:emerg] [pid 15902:tid 47671748469040] AH01177: Failed to lookup provider 'shm' for 'slotmem': is mod_slotmem_shm loaded?? Maybe its possible to comment in slotmem_shm_module in the default httpd.conf? Also commenting out the "lbmethod_heartbeat_module" line makes sense to me, since there is no mod_heartbeat* module loaded/configured in the default conf. This would prevent the "AH02282: No slotmem from mod_heartmonitor" warning. regards, zisis
Re: Funny suggestion
On 15 Nov 2012, at 6:12 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > I moved the "optimized event" MPM into trunk, and called > it just 'eventopt'... Wouldn't it be funny if I renamed > it 'motorz' ? Dragging out my 1980s movie references, you might name it "ludicrousspeed"? Regards, Graham -- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
