Note that flood_round_robin.c's apr_uri_default_port_for_scheme() now must
also become apr_uri_port_of_scheme() to match the latest apr-util.lib.
apr_poll has been put back.
-Norman Tuttle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 21 Nov 2003, Norman Tuttle wrote:
Apparently, Flood development cannot keep up
MATHIHALLI,MADHUSUDAN (HP-Cupertino,ex1) wrote:
Hmmn. Interesting.
1. Did you include the cgid restart fix ?
I don't think so. It's the httpd-2.0.48 tarball + mod_specweb99.
2. Are you driving the server with the SPECweb99 recommended CGI load ?
DYNAMIC_CGI_GET=.005
I believe that's the
This appers to be too difficult for the users list ... can anyone here help?
Solaris 9 8/03 SPARC
gcc 2.95.3
Solaris /usr/ccs/bin compiler tools
apache 1.3.29/mod_ssl-2.8.16-1.3.29/openssl-0.9.7c/mm-1.3.0
I am using the same build procedure and sources as on Solaris 8 machines.
All works
Lars Hecking wrote:
# ./apachectl configtest
Syntax error on line 205 of /usr/local/apache/conf/httpd.conf:
Cannot load /usr/local/apache/libexec/mod_mime_magic.so into server: ld.so.1:
/usr/local/apache/bin/httpd: fatal: relocation error: file
/usr/local/apache/libexec/mod_mime_magic.so:
mm library is compiled statically only, and I have verified during make
that the correct cpp/ld paths are used.
Can you do a test build with pure, unpatched Apache 1.3.latest and see if
you hit the same error?
Plain, unpatched 1.3.29 without mod_ssl and mm gives the same error.
#
André Malo wrote:
* Brian Akins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
* Replace some of the mutex locking in the worker MPM with
atomic operations for higher concurrency.
server/mpm/worker/fdqueue.c 1.24, 1.25
+1: brianp
Is anyone working on this right now?
Lars Hecking wrote:
Plain, unpatched 1.3.29 without mod_ssl and mm gives the same error.
# ./apachectl configtest
Syntax error on line 205 of /WWWserv/conf/httpd.conf:
Cannot load /WWWserv/libexec/mod_mime_magic.so into server: ld.so.1:
/WWWserv/bin/httpd: fatal: relocation error: file
I have been thinking about this and just wanted to see if it were possible.
Say that MaxClients is 1024. Normally, with keepalives turned on, all
1024 of these threads (or proc's) can be busy doing keep alives which
means that they could just be sitting around waiting for them to time
out.
latest == 29 is a sufficient approximation :) (I don't recall any build
changes whatsoever recently)
I can try it on a Solaris 9 box. What configure invocation are you using
and which compiler?
gcc 2.95.3, no GNU binutils. apache is configured with
OPTIM=-O2 \
./configure \
Lars Hecking wrote
:
gcc 2.95.3, no GNU binutils. apache is configured with
OPTIM=-O2 \
./configure \
I tweaked only the prefix option and it appears to work fine for me. I too
have gcc 2.95.3 (from Sun freeware CD I'd guess) and AFAIK I'm not using GNU
binutils either.
What does this show
I tweaked only the prefix option and it appears to work fine for me. I too
have gcc 2.95.3 (from Sun freeware CD I'd guess) and AFAIK I'm not using
GNU binutils either.
What does this show for your build?
$ nm /usr/local/apache/bin/httpd | grep alloc
[403] | 0| 0|FILE
Lars Hecking wrote:
$ nm /usr/local/apache/bin/httpd | grep alloc
[403] | 0| 0|FILE |LOCL |0|ABS|alloc.c
[406] |518516| 4|OBJT |LOCL |0|13 |alloc_mutex
[1675] |156472| 8|FUNC |GLOB |0|10 |ap_cleanup_alloc
[1332] |156420|
Your libc references have that SYSVABI_1.3 tag, which mine done. My
Solaris 9 is a bit older. I have no idea what the problem is.
Hhm. I'll take this to the sunmanagers list then ...
$ cat /etc/release
Solaris 9 12/02 s9s_u2wos_10a SPARC
Copyright
Cliff Woolley wrote:
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003, Robert La Ferla wrote:
In the interim, it would be nice to see some mention of a workaround on
the site for users.
Done. Let me know if you think that there are more details I could add
that would be helpful.
--Cliff
You guys are great!
Brian Akins wrote:
I have been thinking about this and just wanted to see if it were possible.
Say that MaxClients is 1024. Normally, with keepalives turned on, all
1024 of these threads (or proc's) can be busy doing keep alives which
means that they could just be sitting around waiting for
Hhm. I'll take this to the sunmanagers list then ...
Jeff, one more thing: Could you email me, off-list, the output of
truss /usr/local/apache/bin/httpd -t? You can use -o to capture the
output into a file.
Lars Hecking wrote:
Jeff, one more thing: Could you email me, off-list, the output of
truss /usr/local/apache/bin/httpd -t? You can use -o to capture the
output into a file.
done
Subject says it all.
8cut-here-8
Index: httpd.h
===
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/httpd-2.0/include/httpd.h,v
retrieving revision 1.201
diff -u -r1.201 httpd.h
--- httpd.h
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003, Brian Akins wrote:
I did a backport of the stuff in HEAD to 2.0.48. It is stable, though,
I do not know how efficient it is. Anyone interested in seeing it?
Sure, go ahead and post it. :)
--Cliff
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003, B. W. Fitzpatrick wrote:
Subject says it all.
Done.
On Nov 24, 2003, at 9:04 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Your libc references have that SYSVABI_1.3 tag, which mine done. My
Solaris 9 is a bit older. I have no idea what the problem is.
I've run into this exact issue before, as well.
Only, on Solaris 8 servers, and the offending modules being
+ nd replies: But if it can't be 0 the alternatives thereafter
make no
+ sense anymore, right?
Good point, so if that is true then isn't the code in the else part of
ap_get_server_port() also wrong. In other words, ap_default_port()
would never be called if UseCanonicalName
On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 12:54:05AM -0500, Robert La Ferla wrote:
I have no problem with running release candidates and contributing. I
have contributed in the past by the way... In fact, I wouldn't object
to trying nightly or weekly builds. The problem is that I don't see
those as easily
On Sun, Nov 23, 2003 at 10:13:09PM -0500, Robert La Ferla wrote:
What testing gets performed prior to an official httpd 2.x release? I
think whatever test suite is used, needs some updating to include
configurations that utilize more features like user tracking, caching
and multi-views.
Yeah, I have to take responsibility for this bug. Apologies to all. Fans
of irony will appreciate that I unwittingly introduced this new bug
while solving a long-standing cookie header parsing bug! Ouch...
Thanks, Cliff, for posting the note on httpd.apache.org.
-Manni
-Original
Manni Wood wrote:
Yeah, I have to take responsibility for this bug. Apologies to all. Fans
of irony will appreciate that I unwittingly introduced this new bug
while solving a long-standing cookie header parsing bug! Ouch...
May be it's a good time to remove the cookie handling from the core and
in apache-1.3 it was possible to emulate nph (non-parsed headers) handlers by
simply disabling the headers parsing in the sent response. It no longer works
in httpd-2.0 that way.
Looking at mod_cgi.c, it plays it dirty and shortcuts the filters chain to
bypass any output filters that deal with
27 matches
Mail list logo
