Er, just as a notice, the second test for multipart/ was already
correct, but I've changed it to 'not ctypes.startswith(multipart/)'
for better code consistency.
Regards,
Nicolas
2005/9/8, Nicolas Lehuen [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi Dominic,
That's perfectly acceptable. I've just used the
Hello,
I would like to point to some simple bug in session handling. The problem
occurs when you want to have persistens sessions, i.e. the ones which
will stay after the user close the browser window (this is useful for
example if you want to let him stay logged-on). For this reason it is
Jim Gallacher wrote ..
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
I've been away this weekend - just got back, but I'm too busy to try
to
read all the multiple-interpreter related comments. I guess my question
is - can someone provide a quick summary of how far we are from 3.2.1b
test
I don't use sessions enough to comment on whether this is an appropriate
change for mod_python or not, but I would suggest that you log an
enhancement request at:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON?report=select
This will ensure any request is not overlooked. It is also preferred
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
Anybody got FreeBSD? I'm getting this. This is an old and possibly
misconfigured system, so the problem could be on my end.
FreeBSD 4.9
apache 2.0.53 (from ports)
python 2.3.3
$ make
Compiling for DSO.
/usr/local/sbin/apxs
On Thu, 8 Sep 2005, Jim Gallacher wrote:
I don't have FreeBSD, or any experience with any BSD, but I won't let that
stop me from commenting. :)
I don't see apr-0 listed in your includes in the above output.
APR_THREAD_MUTEX_UNNESTED is defined in apr_thread_mutex.h, which on debian
is in
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
On Thu, 8 Sep 2005, Jim Gallacher wrote:
I don't have FreeBSD, or any experience with any BSD, but I won't let
that stop me from commenting. :)
I don't see apr-0 listed in your includes in the above output.
APR_THREAD_MUTEX_UNNESTED is defined in
2005/9/8, Jorey Bump [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Jim Gallacher wrote:
Nicolas Lehuen wrote:
Well, why not keep our plan of releasing 3.2 ASAP and save this
problem for a later 3.2.x as a bug fix ?
Making subsequent bug-fix releases should be fast and easy. We cannot
afford to repeat the long
On 09/09/2005, at 10:02 AM, Jim Gallacher wrote:
As far as some future version breaking compatibility, I favour a
bigger jump in the major number: 3.2 - 4.0. This is server software
after all, and some people may prefer to maintain an older version for
a longer period, foregoing new features
Joe,
after moving upload() to APR::Request, I think
APR::Request::CGI::upload() should be removed. Am I right?
Here's a patch
Index: glue/perl/xsbuilder/APR/Request/CGI/CGI.pm
===
--- glue/perl/xsbuilder/APR/Request/CGI/CGI.pm
Hi all,
I recall a while back someone mentioned that Windows MSI installers
including SSL were available from a download site in Europe.
Can anyone point out where these can be found?
Google is no help, as searches return hundreds of hits to the no ssl
version on all the Apache mirrors :(
Just a FYI: I'm like *this close* to buttoning up the lbmethod-as-provider
changes, and I like it. Stay tuned :)
--
===
Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
Sith
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Just a FYI: I'm like *this close* to buttoning up the lbmethod-as-provider
changes, and I like it. Stay tuned :)
Great :)
Can you provide the example for the custom methods?
I mean, there is a API, but how to write a balancer
module that will use that new api?
A simple
Graham Leggett wrote:
Hi all,
I recall a while back someone mentioned that Windows MSI installers
including SSL were available from a download site in Europe.
Can anyone point out where these can be found?
Google is no help, as searches return hundreds of hits to the no ssl
version on all the
I've gone ahead and changed from the register-lbmethod-as-hook
to register-lbmethod-as-provider implementation. This avoids
having to store them in the per-server config struct. As mentioned,
this required adding a list providers function to providers.c.
Full patch is below:
On Wednesday, September 07, 2005 at 5:47:10 pm, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
The requirement I'm trying to fulfill is multiple group requires
within ldap.
I figured making it generic within ldap using satisfy would be a good
idea,
though this seems to be
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: pquerna
Date: Thu Sep 8 13:05:21 2005
New Revision: 279612
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=279612view=rev
Log:
s/alpha/beta/i for 2.1.7.
I'm confused... reviewing the entire month's archive for the word
'beta' I counted
+1 Jim, Paul, Brad, Jeff,
Paul Querna wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
+1 Jim, Paul, Brad, Jeff, Justin
-1 Myself, Mladen, Nick, Rainer
[Joe] did vote +1:
Ack, thanks (and as I said, sorry that I missed that)
We are voting on 2.1.7-beta. We are voting to certify that as a
release. By my count of binding
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs/httpd/httpd/dist/Announcement21.txt?rev=279680r1=279679r2=279680view=diff
==
--- httpd/httpd/dist/Announcement21.txt (original)
+++ httpd/httpd/dist/Announcement21.txt Thu Sep 8
19 matches
Mail list logo
