Re: Fwd: Bug and Possible Fix in JK 1.2.8 (I am not sure where/how to post this)

2005-02-15 Thread TECHNICAL DIRECTOR 
PLEASE STOP SENDINU US YOUR E-MAILS...Satalogue
--- Mladen Turk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >> From: "Ivo Conde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> Here is the buggy part of the method:
> >>
> >>  case 4:
> >>  switch (method[0])
> >>  {
> >>  case 'H':
> >>  return (method[1] == 'E'
> >>  && method[2] == 'A'
> >>  && method[3] == 'D'
> >>  ? SC_M_GET : UNKNOWN_METHOD);
> >>
> 
> Standard copy/paste error :).
> Commited. Thanks for spotting that.
> 
> Regards,
> Mladen.
> 
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 


=
FROM SATALOGUE TECHNICAL DEPARTMENT...WE HAVE READ YOUR E-MAIL...

Please call our Duty Engineer on 01332 811564 - for a proper 'one to one' 
answer as further information and / or clarification is required from you in 
order to answer your question properly .
   He is available from 10am until 5pm Monday to Friday inclusive.

TO  RETURN TO  SATALOGUE WEBSITE: Click on to link below.

  http://www.satalogue.com/about.htm

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Fwd: Bug and Possible Fix in JK 1.2.8 (I am not sure where/how to post this)

2005-02-15 Thread TECHNICAL DIRECTOR 
PLEASE STOP SENDING US YOUR E-MAILSSatalogue
--- Pier Fumagalli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> 
> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> > From: "Ivo Conde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: 15 February 2005 01:43:39 GMT
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: Bug and Possible Fix in JK 1.2.8 (I am not sure where/how to 
> > post this)
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >   
> >
> > I have found a bug and possible fix in the latest version (1.2.8) of 
> > the JK Connector for Apache+Tomcat.
> >
> >   
> >
> > The bug:
> >
> > JK “converts” user http HEAD requests made to Apache into http GET 
> > calls to Tomcat
> >
> >  
> >
> > The fix:
> >
> > There seems to be in a error in jk_ajp_common.c , inside the method 
> > static int sc_for_req_method(const char *method, size_t len).
> >
> > The switch statement is incorrectly returning the GET method for the 
> > HEAD case.
> >
> >  
> >
> > Here is the buggy part of the method:
> >
> >  case 4:
> >  switch (method[0])
> >  {
> >  case 'H':
> >  return (method[1] == 'E'
> >  && method[2] == 'A'
> >  && method[3] == 'D'
> >  ? SC_M_GET : UNKNOWN_METHOD);
> >
> > ………
> >
> > The fix:
> >
> >  
> >
> >  case 4:
> >  switch (method[0])
> >  {
> >  case 'H':
> >  return (method[1] == 'E'
> >  && method[2] == 'A'
> >  && method[3] == 'D'
> >  ? SC_M_HEAD : UNKNOWN_METHOD);  // REPLACE GET BY
> 
> > HEAD
> >
> >  
> >
> >  
> >
> > The fix worked, at least for me.
> >
> >  
> >
> > The bug occurred in a Linux Red Hat Entreprise, Kernel 2.4.21-27.EL , 
> > EMT64 Processor (x86_64 GNU/Linux)
> >
> >  
> >
> > Can you please forward this email to the right place? Sorry if I’m not
> 
> > following the proper rules to report this, but I don’t have much time 
> > to learn about bug/patch submission methods on jakarta. I did search 
> > your bug database but did not find this bug anywhere. I hope this can 
> > be of some help anyway. This is my first contribution to the open 
> > source community since years, and  I wouldn’t sleep at night if I 
> > missed this opportunity to give something back, after having received 
> > so much from it.
> >
> >  
> >
> > Thanks and best regards,
> >
> >  Ivo
> >
> >  
> >
> >  
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 2 application/pkcs7-signature name=smime.p7s



=
FROM SATALOGUE TECHNICAL DEPARTMENT...WE HAVE READ YOUR E-MAIL...

Please call our Duty Engineer on 01332 811564 - for a proper 'one to one' 
answer as further information and / or clarification is required from you in 
order to answer your question properly .
   He is available from 10am until 5pm Monday to Friday inclusive.

TO  RETURN TO  SATALOGUE WEBSITE: Click on to link below.

  http://www.satalogue.com/about.htm

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Fwd: Bug and Possible Fix in JK 1.2.8 (I am not sure where/how to post this)

2005-02-15 Thread Mladen Turk 
Pier Fumagalli wrote:

From: "Ivo Conde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Here is the buggy part of the method:
 case 4:
 switch (method[0])
 {
 case 'H':
 return (method[1] == 'E'
 && method[2] == 'A'
 && method[3] == 'D'
 ? SC_M_GET : UNKNOWN_METHOD);
Standard copy/paste error :).
Commited. Thanks for spotting that.
Regards,
Mladen.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fwd: Bug and Possible Fix in JK 1.2.8 (I am not sure where/how to post this)

2005-02-15 Thread Pier Fumagalli 

Begin forwarded message:
From: "Ivo Conde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 15 February 2005 01:43:39 GMT
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Bug and Possible Fix in JK 1.2.8 (I am not sure where/how to 
post this)

Hi,
  
I have found a bug and possible fix in the latest version (1.2.8) of 
the JK Connector for Apache+Tomcat.

  
The bug:
JK “converts” user http HEAD requests made to Apache into http GET 
calls to Tomcat

 
The fix:
There seems to be in a error in jk_ajp_common.c , inside the method 
static int sc_for_req_method(const char *method, size_t len).

The switch statement is incorrectly returning the GET method for the 
HEAD case.

 
Here is the buggy part of the method:
 case 4:
 switch (method[0])
 {
 case 'H':
 return (method[1] == 'E'
 && method[2] == 'A'
 && method[3] == 'D'
 ? SC_M_GET : UNKNOWN_METHOD);
………
The fix:
 
 case 4:
 switch (method[0])
 {
 case 'H':
 return (method[1] == 'E'
 && method[2] == 'A'
 && method[3] == 'D'
 ? SC_M_HEAD : UNKNOWN_METHOD);  // REPLACE GET BY 
HEAD

 
 
The fix worked, at least for me.
 
The bug occurred in a Linux Red Hat Entreprise, Kernel 2.4.21-27.EL , 
EMT64 Processor (x86_64 GNU/Linux)

 
Can you please forward this email to the right place? Sorry if I’m not 
following the proper rules to report this, but I don’t have much time 
to learn about bug/patch submission methods on jakarta. I did search 
your bug database but did not find this bug anywhere. I hope this can 
be of some help anyway. This is my first contribution to the open 
source community since years, and  I wouldn’t sleep at night if I 
missed this opportunity to give something back, after having received 
so much from it.

 
Thanks and best regards,
 Ivo
 
 


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature