[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON-46?page=all ]
Graham Dumpleton updated MODPYTHON-46:
--
Attachment: silent.diff.txt
This fixes the wrong logic problem in the definition of SILENT/NOTSILENT.
It avoids the infinite loop bug described
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON-68?page=comments#action_12318143
]
Graham Dumpleton commented on MODPYTHON-68:
---
I add my own -1 to this patch to add req.script_name. It is just as easy to
stick it in a root level handler
This raise this issue : under Win32, the preferred way to build mod_python is to run :
python setup.py.in bdist_wininst --install-script win32_postinstall.py
This leaves no room to specify a MAX_LOCK definition override, but I
guess we could put it in setup.py, since extension modules can have
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005, Jim Gallacher wrote:
My question is : should we keep on with ./configure ; make ; make install
or try to do everything in setup.py ?
As long as we can put setup.py in a Makefile. ;)
Seriously though, ./configure --help; ./configure; make; make install; is
just such
Jim Gallacher writes:
Daniel Popowich wrote:
The recent discussion of max locks and deadlocking issues with
_apache._global_(un)?lock() are timely for me:
I'm in the middle of writing a caching module for mod_python servlets
so a developer can have the output of a servlet cached,
Daniel Popowich wrote:
Jim Gallacher writes:
Daniel Popowich wrote:
The recent discussion of max locks and deadlocking issues with
_apache._global_(un)?lock() are timely for me:
I'm in the middle of writing a caching module for mod_python servlets
so a developer can have the output of a
On Aug 8, 2005, at 10:55 PM, Aaron Bannert wrote:
I can't believe you guys are still debating the merits of RTC over CTR
after all this time. RTC killed the momentum in this project a long
time
ago.
That doesn't make sense, Aaron. The other branches are CTR and
I don't see anyone making
On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 01:46:30PM -0700, Paul Querna wrote:
Bill Stoddard wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
I have a bug I'd like to squash in mod_auth_ldap.c in 2.0 that doesn't
exist in 2.1/2.2 (non-existent authn_ldap_request_t req struct during
auth check)... since the module is
Joe Orton wrote:
On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 01:46:30PM -0700, Paul Querna wrote:
Bill Stoddard wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
I have a bug I'd like to squash in mod_auth_ldap.c in 2.0 that doesn't
exist in 2.1/2.2 (non-existent authn_ldap_request_t req struct during
auth check)... since the
Does anyone have any idea why/whether the BASE HREF is required in the
proxy_ftp html code returned to the client? I would like to remove it as it is
breaking relative links for my client's browsers that are not using an
Authorization header. I have not found anywhere in the RFCs where it is
On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 07:11:39AM -0500, William Rowe wrote:
At 09:51 PM 8/7/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: wrowe
Date: Sun Aug 7 19:51:32 2005
New Revision: 230733
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=230733view=rev
Log:
Fix a double-termination case in svn trunk/; we
Jon Snow wrote:
Does anyone have any idea why/whether the BASE HREF is required in the
proxy_ftp html code returned to the client? I would like to remove it as it is
breaking relative links for my client's browsers that are not using an
Authorization header. I have not found anywhere in the
Jon Snow wrote:
Does anyone have any idea why/whether the BASE HREF is required in the
proxy_ftp html code returned to the client?
I've no idea either. The more I try and speculate, the less
I can find a reason that works.
Assuming whoever implemented it had some valid reason for it,
I
Hi,
standalone running and only occasionally used server for testing is a bit
costly for me and as suggested by Nick Kew its inetd-spawning each time during
a testing session would be possibly even worse than the former case.
Just FYI attached 'caching' method by xinetd(8) handled connections
On Aug 9, 2005, at 1:55 AM, Aaron Bannert wrote:
I can't believe you guys are still debating the merits of RTC over CTR
after all this time. RTC killed the momentum in this project a long
time
ago.
The RTC experiment was tried and has failed. Can we please
go back to the way things were,
Thanks for your replies.
There is a way to create a request rec using function:
ap_read_request(conn_rec *).
now conn_rec could be created using ap_run_create_connection function
which takes pool, socket, bucket and some other arguments. I waasnt
sure how to get socket information as we cannot
Aaron Bannert wrote:
*** Look at the writing on the wall: RTC killed this project.
This year there have only been 3 tarballs released:
- 2.1.3 (alpha)
- 2.0.53 and 2.0.54
- no releases of 1.3
Missing:
2.1.4 (alpha)
2.1.6 (alpha)
I don't believe changing RTC/CTR policy is the solution
[[[
Fix typo in manual.
* docs/manual/logs.xml: typo. flexibly--flexible.
]]]
Index: docs/manual/logs.xml
===
--- docs/manual/logs.xml(revision 231041)
+++ docs/manual/logs.xml(working copy)
@@ -425,7 +425,7 @@
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON-46?page=comments#action_12318162
]
Jim Gallacher commented on MODPYTHON-46:
I've reviewed the source code and according to src/include/hlist.c:
typedef struct hl_entry {
const char
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 09:11:56AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
I think that RTC has a place, but too often RTC is used as a club
to slow down development. Small changes that could easily
be made once the code has been committed instead result in
cycles of Wouldn't it be best to do this? and
Jim Jagielski wrote:
I think that RTC has a place, but too often RTC is used as a club
to slow down development. Small changes that could easily
be made once the code has been committed instead result in
cycles of Wouldn't it be best to do this? and another
round of patch-vote commences.
That
Graham,
Thanks. This patch definately will do the trick as I have already applied the
same to test it. The browser reuses the original user:[EMAIL PROTECTED] syntax
for
each subsequent relative URL access. This results in the same behaviour as
using a squid proxy which does not use a base
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005, Jim Gallacher (JIRA) wrote:
pspcache will hash to one of 31 mutexes. Therefore there is a 1 in 31
chance for a hash collision if a session is used in the same request,
which would result in a deadlock. (This has been confirmed by testing.)
Most obvious solution is to use
I don't have a jira account, but I wanted to comment that it's highly
unlikely you would ever have a ConnectionHandler and any other type of
handler defined, since ConnectionHandler pretty much co-opts apache's
handling of the connection at all. So +1 on PythonHandlerModule completely
Another thing that should probably go in before 3.2. The RedHat people
patch mod_python with this patch in the source RPM (smart-ass comment
included):
-
Stealing 1/4 of the available SysV semaphores is not polite behaviour.
---
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005, Jim Gallacher (JIRA) wrote:
I have no objection to disabling PythonConnectionHandler within
PythonHandlerModule. If there are no objections I'll apply Graham's
patch.
+1
Grisha
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
Another thing that should probably go in before 3.2. The RedHat people
patch mod_python with this patch in the source RPM (smart-ass comment
included):
-
Stealing 1/4 of the available SysV semaphores is not polite behaviour.
---
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005, Jim Gallacher (JIRA) wrote:
pspcache will hash to one of 31 mutexes. Therefore there is a 1 in
31 chance for a hash collision if a session is used in the same
request, which would result in a deadlock. (This has been confirmed by
I've been trying to speed up the release cycles for years, but
it's only gotten slower with all the red tape.
The slow release cycles are just another symptom of a broken process,
they are not the cause.
-aaron
On Aug 9, 2005, at 7:00 AM, Paul Querna wrote:
Aaron Bannert wrote:
*** Look
I definitely agree that RTC requires a lengthy time commitment
that many of us simply can't give, while CTR allows for much more
fluid development process. This is the difference between a full-time
day job and a hobby.
How many of you only spend less than an hour a day doing httpd dev work?
Parin Shah wrote:
There is a way to create a request rec using function:
ap_read_request(conn_rec *).
Would there be value in teaching ap_read_request() how to not break if
you called ap_read_request(NULL)?
Alternatively ap_read_request() could be broken up into
ap_read_request() and
At 09:46 AM 8/9/2005, Mads Toftum wrote:
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 09:11:56AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
I think that RTC has a place, but too often RTC is used as a club
to slow down development. Small changes that could easily
be made once the code has been committed instead result in
cycles
No, 2.0 was a moving target because there was lots of active
development and things were getting rapidly fixed and rolled into
tarballs for our beta testers to pound on. There were easily 3 times
as many developers working on 2.0 than there are now.
Moving Target Stagnation
Bill's changes were
On Aug 9, 2005, at 11:24 AM, Aaron Bannert wrote:
Version control is your friend,
use it.
It is a shame that despite the advantages of svn over cvs for
tags/branches/etc, we are hardly using them effectively.
On Aug 9, 2005, at 7:40 AM, Nick Kew wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
I think that RTC has a place, but too often RTC is used as a club
to slow down development. Small changes that could easily
be made once the code has been committed instead result in
cycles of Wouldn't it be best to do this?
On Tuesday, August 09, 2005 at 8:40 am, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think there could be some mileage in a hybrid policy, with
lazy consensus on simple bugfixes and RTC on any new functionality
or substantial changes. There's a problem of definition in there,
What other branches are CTR? 1.3? 2.0?
Dependency on any outside library, APR included, is going to
cause dependency on that library's release cycle. Stagnation
happened after 2.0 was released, however.
On another note, if APR is the problem, then why are we even
talking about branching 2.2
Aaron Bannert wrote:
What other branches are CTR? 1.3? 2.0?
Dependency on any outside library, APR included, is going to
cause dependency on that library's release cycle. Stagnation
happened after 2.0 was released, however.
On another note, if APR is the problem, then why are we even
Andreas Steinmetz wrote:
Aaron Bannert wrote:
What other branches are CTR? 1.3? 2.0?
Dependency on any outside library, APR included, is going to
cause dependency on that library's release cycle. Stagnation
happened after 2.0 was released, however.
On another note, if APR is the problem, then
Paul Querna wrote:
Oh Please, don't give me that crap. Submit a patch, and it will get in
the next release. The bug you mention does not have a patch. If it
matters so much to you, fix it yourself.
Nice attitude. So the bug reporter must be a I know how to fix
everything in the world because
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 09:05:45AM -0700, Paul Querna wrote:
The current blocking issue in APR APR-Util is that we can *only*
release apr and apr-util of the exact same version number, due to
problems in the Netware build system. This means to release APR 1.2.0,
we must release APR-Util
Andreas Steinmetz wrote:
Paul Querna wrote:
Oh Please, don't give me that crap. Submit a patch, and it will get in
the next release. The bug you mention does not have a patch. If it
matters so much to you, fix it yourself.
Nice attitude. So the bug reporter must be a I know how to fix
On Tuesday, August 09, 2005 at 10:05 am, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The current blocking issue in APR APR-Util is that we can *only*
release apr and apr-util of the exact same version number, due to
problems in the Netware build system. This means to release APR
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
Another thing that should probably go in before 3.2. The RedHat people
patch mod_python with this patch in the source RPM (smart-ass comment
included):
-
Stealing 1/4 of the available SysV semaphores is not polite behaviour.
---
On Tuesday, August 09, 2005 at 10:16 am, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or just release as-is, if nobody is going to fix the Netware build
then
Netware won't work, big deal. All three Netware users can write in
and
ask for their money back :)
joe
Oh come on,
Paul Querna wrote:
Andreas Steinmetz wrote:
Paul Querna wrote:
Oh Please, don't give me that crap. Submit a patch, and it will get in
the next release. The bug you mention does not have a patch. If it
matters so much to you, fix it yourself.
Nice attitude. So the bug reporter must be a I
Brad Nicholes wrote:
On Tuesday, August 09, 2005 at 10:16 am, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or just release as-is, if nobody is going to fix the Netware build
then
Netware won't work, big deal. All three Netware users can write in
and
ask for their money
At 04:38 AM 8/9/2005, Joe Orton wrote:
Great, yes with last night's regression run the segfaults with worker
were gone and the tests are all passing for prefork and worker again on
the trunk - thanks a lot Bill. -Werror builds are failing though:
mod_proxy_http.c: In function
Brad Nicholes wrote:
But on the other hand, there shouldn't be a reason why apr-util can't be
released at anytime regardless of why. If there is a linkage between
apr 1.2.0 and apr-util 1.2.0 that just means that they happen to be
released at the same time. There is nothing sacred about what
On Tuesday, August 09, 2005 at 10:47 am, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you want to place a cause on why 2.2 hasn't been released, I feel
that
there is only one real reason. I gave up on trying to do 2.1/2.2
releases
because I got fed up with having every
Add configure --with-max-locks option to set MAX_LOCKS.
---
Key: MODPYTHON-70
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON-70
Project: mod_python
Type: New Feature
Components: core
Versions: 3.2.0
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON-70?page=comments#action_12318192
]
Jim Gallacher commented on MODPYTHON-70:
Changes committed. This issue can be closed.
Add configure --with-max-locks option to set MAX_LOCKS.
OK, we allegedly have:
- 2.2 waiting on netware
- netware waiting on apr-util 1.2
- apr-util 1.2 waiting on apr_dbd
'Twas I who asked for the apr-util delay at apachecon.
But in my post to [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 3rd August, I thought I was making
it clear that I no longer wish to hold it up. So,
I'm not talking about 2.2. I'm talking about a severe slowdown in the
pace of development on this entire project.
And it sounds like you've been feeling the effects of all the red tape
too, with being fed up trying to follow through with a release.
There are two separate issues:
* The
POSTING 1:
To prevent my webserver from getting bogged down by
long-running CGI scripts, which are no longer
connected to the client's browser, I am trying to kill
the CGI as soon as the connection with the browser
breaks.
In the older version of Apache (1.3 for example) a CGI
script could
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 11:40:36AM -0500, William Rowe wrote:
At 04:38 AM 8/9/2005, Joe Orton wrote:
Great, yes with last night's regression run the segfaults with worker
were gone and the tests are all passing for prefork and worker again on
the trunk - thanks a lot Bill. -Werror builds
is libssl an intentional new core dependency for trunk?
./configure ; make
gets me;
mod_setenvif.c:126: error: syntax error before '*' token
mod_setenvif.c:126: warning: data definition has no type or storage class
mod_setenvif.c: In function `match_headers':
mod_setenvif.c:542:
On 8/9/05, Ian Holsman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
cost of devoting a senior engineer for the next month or two to help
'field test' apache 2.2 in a high scale environment, identifying and
submitting patches to 2.2 is Y.
Just wondering, when will Win32 binaries of 2.1/2.2 be available for
Jim Jagielski wrote:
I have a bug I'd like to squash in mod_auth_ldap.c in 2.0 that doesn't
exist in 2.1/2.2 (non-existent authn_ldap_request_t req struct during
auth check)... since the module is experimental, can I assume CTR ?
Hey Jim
can you post the patch ?
while this discussion about
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
is libssl an intentional new core dependency for trunk?
Huh?
./configure ; make
gets me;
mod_setenvif.c:126: error: syntax error before '*' token
mod_setenvif.c:126: warning: data definition has no type or storage class
mod_setenvif.c: In function
On Aug 9, 2005, at 11:28 AM, Aaron Bannert wrote:
I'm not talking about 2.2. I'm talking about a severe slowdown in the
pace of development on this entire project.
Less talk, more do.
And it sounds like you've been feeling the effects of all the red tape
too, with being fed up trying to
Hi All,
I am trying to compile a cgi-bin program and
also making use of an Apache DSO library for using some of the features already
implemented in the DSO. The compilation goes fine and the binary gets created.
But, when I run the binary, it randomly dumps core; dbx on (AIX) points to
Title: Dynamic configuration
I am trying to implement a module which will read some ini file and will fill all server records of apache. I do not want to have number of virtual hosts in http.conf file similar to mass virtual hosting. I would like to read the virtual host information from the
Title: Dynamic configuration
I am trying to implement a module
which will read some ini file and will fill all server records of apache. I do
not want to have number of virtual hosts in http.conf file similar to mass
virtual hosting.wouldlike
to read the virtual host information from the
64 matches
Mail list logo
