On 02/02/2006, at 5:54 PM, Nicolas Lehuen wrote:
Having read your work on Vampire (and its
module importing mechanism) I'm pretty sure it won't be long.
The new importer is actually a complete rewrite and some things
are done quite differently to what was done in Vampire. I have in
effect
I am hereby happy to tell you that by removing the call to enumerate()
in the publisher code, the whole test suite passes on Python 2.2
without any further patch or hack. I've checked in the modification
which this time should not pose any problem since it's pretty basic
and non intrusive.
Jim Gallacher writes:
Daniel J. Popowich wrote:
Regardless, I do not think it is within the scope of mod_python
developers to keep users forward-compatible with the underlying python
version. Sorry, but IMHO, this is not scalable software engineering.
I'll re-read this paragraph after
My official vote is eventually -1 for 3.2.6, see the previous
discussion for why I've changed my mind.
However I'm +1 on releasing 3.2.7 without a restrained testing period,
not a long one like for 3.2.6.
Regards,
Nicolas
2006/2/2, Jim Gallacher [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I know you said no discussion
I'm getting a unit test failure.
FAIL: test_publisher_cache (__main__.PerRequestTestCase)
--
Traceback (most recent call last):
File test.py, line 1836, in test_publisher_cache
self.fail(
File
I have a bunch of code I was thinking of contributing to mod_python,
but would like some opinions before doing so (because I don't
know if this is the best place)...
Basically I wrote some utility functions which can be used to
assist with content negotiation; such as parsing the various
Accept-*
Daniel J. Popowich wrote ..
PS
If it's not obvious I'm gearing up to get way more involved...I've
been waiting (patiently) for 3.2 to be released and jump in with new
3.3 development...I guess I'm chomping at the bit...
We probably want to defer until after 3.2.7 (final) is released to have
Allow PythonImport to optionally call function in module.
-
Key: MODPYTHON-118
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON-118
Project: mod_python
Type: Wish
Components: core
Versions: 3.3
Very interesting. I'll only comment on one issue right now.
Daniel J. Popowich wrote ..
o And...no suprise...I'd like to try to sell mpservlets for
inclusion in the main distro. No tears if it's not, but I think
it fills a void and I'd like to make a case for its inclusion.
I
Jim Gallacher wrote:
Graham Dumpleton wrote:
Jim Gallacher wrote ..
I'm getting a unit test failure.
FAIL: test_publisher_cache (__main__.PerRequestTestCase)
--
Traceback (most recent call last):
File test.py, line 1836,
Graham Dumpleton wrote:
Jim Gallacher wrote ..
It is because you probably have a prefork/worker MPM.
The test as written will only reliably work for winnt MPM.
Doh! Prefork bites us in the a** yet again. :)
On UNIX boxes
the subsequent requests could be handled by a different child
Please download, test, and report back on the following
candidate tarball:
http://people.apache.org/~joes/libapreq2-2.07-rc4.tar.gz
--
Joe Schaefer
Title: Apache proxy behaviour...
Hi there,
I came with a problem which surprise me, as I thought Apache was working
differently...
We have Apache 2.0.55 working in reverse-proxy in front of different
webservers.
One of our website takes a long time to process requests and respond to
the
The reverse proxy read a brigade, then forward it to the client. It should not
buffer the response but forward block of data. Maybe it's because of deflate
or mod_security...
But this behaviour is not normal imho.
Matthieu
On Thursday 02 February 2006 16:13, CASTELLE Thomas wrote:
Hi there,
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Matthieu Estrade
The reverse proxy read a brigade, then forward it to the
client. It should not
buffer the response but forward block of data. Maybe it's
because of deflate
mod_deflate buffers definitely. You need to turn it off for
such pages
OK, I know we've had some votes on this before, but I'd like to put this
in a separate thread where it's not intermixed with all kinds of other
things.
This is a vote for the core group. We can release the 3.2.6 tarball as is
or fix the connection handler bugs (there are two of them - the
There is no such thing as an intermediate proxy that has any kind
of 'filtering' going on that won't, on some occasions, need to 'buffer'
some data. I believe even mod_include will 'wait' for tags to resolve
if they split across buffers.
The real questions to ask is...
Why is the proxy timing
Well, I think increasing
the proxy timeout isnt a good idea on a reverse-proxy in a production environment
as it quickly monopolize, when one of the proxied webservers badly crash, a
huge amount of httpd process waiting for this timeout to occur
Anyway, even if the
Apache timeout is
Hi, I have some specific questions concerning a module I would like to
write. Or I'd, of course, like to know if something already exists that
does the same or similar thing. Please, let me know if there is a more
appropriate mailing list to ask this.
Basically, the module would, upon
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: CASTELLE Thomas .
Anyway, even if the Apache timeout is increased, Firewalls or browsers don't
like idle TCP/IP session either... without speaking of the users ;-)
Regarding my problem, I tried to disable every modules (except mod_proxy of
course),
I know you said no discussion Grisha, but can I have 2 ballots? ;)
-1 If Graham thinks his conn handler fix is good, let's do 3.2.7 today.
+1 If Graham is not sure, we release 3.2.6 now as is, and do a 3.2.7
bugfix in the next 4 to 6 weeks after digging into _conn_read issue further.
So, I
FYI,
I posted a patch to http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37814
I took the easy route and just added a #if block to util_ldap to set a
sizelimit of 2147483647 if the microsoft ldap sdk was in use or
otherwise -1 and use this sizelimit define in ldap_search_ext_s calls.
Graham Dumpleton writes:
On 03/02/2006, at 4:48 AM, Daniel J. Popowich wrote:
My gut says any major release of mod_python be based on one
major.minor release lower than the currently available python. So,
mod_python 3.2 is based on python 2.3; mod_python 3.3 will probably be
based on
Dear All,
I am porting some CGI code to run as a module. It is all pretty
straightforward, except that I can't work out how to get at a POST
request's body. The CGI code reads from stdin, which doesn't seem to be
the right thing to do in the module. I'm probably missing something
obvious;
Jim Gallacher wrote ..
I'm getting a unit test failure.
FAIL: test_publisher_cache (__main__.PerRequestTestCase)
--
Traceback (most recent call last):
File test.py, line 1836, in test_publisher_cache
self.fail(
Daniel J. Popowich wrote ..
Graham Dumpleton writes:
On 03/02/2006, at 4:48 AM, Daniel J. Popowich wrote:
My gut says any major release of mod_python be based on one
major.minor release lower than the currently available python. So,
mod_python 3.2 is based on python 2.3; mod_python
To confirm Jim's arithmetic anyway, I say -1 on 3.2.6 as it stands.
As to 3.2.7, I say +1, subject to removal of problematic test case
as already raised and with us at least confirming tests run OK for
version out of SVN prior to packaging.
Graham
Jim Gallacher wrote ..
According to the Apache
Graham Dumpleton wrote:
Jim Gallacher wrote ..
I'm getting a unit test failure.
FAIL: test_publisher_cache (__main__.PerRequestTestCase)
--
Traceback (most recent call last):
File test.py, line 1836, in test_publisher_cache
On Thursday 02 February 2006 22:45, Phil Endecott wrote:
[chop]
If you had a usable-looking email address. I could reply with
exactly what you need, from something that's not currently
available on a public mailinglist.
--
Nick Kew
Hello,
With something like that :
while (ap_get_brigade(r-input_filters, brigade, AP_MODE_READBYTES,
APR_BLOCK_READ, len) == APR_SUCCESS) {
apr_brigade_flatten(brigade, buf, len);
apr_brigade_cleanup(brigade);
tlen += len;
if (tlen == count_bytes || !len) {
break;
}
1. We've really got to die on ./configure, not make, when we are asked
to --enable-ldap where apr-util wasn't built with ldap. That's bogus;
./configure should describe anticipated problems, not later on.
2. Something's wrong with detection of ssl, even when I explicitly asked
for
31 matches
Mail list logo
