[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON-76?page=comments#action_12367168
]
Graham Dumpleton commented on MODPYTHON-76:
---
Latest update on this issue is that the change of not flushing if filter closed
does not in itself fix the
On 21/02/2006, at 7:08 AM, Jim Gallacher wrote:
The Apache 2.2 support will likely go into the 3.2.9 bugfix release.
We just wanted to get the security problem out of the way first.
Jim, if we are again going to aim for a bug rollup release for 3.2.9
do I
need to stop or hold off on doing
In fact, I was a little bit on hurry when I posted my patch and did a 'svn
diff' but you are right, the file generated by flex should not be included
into the patch, just the file used to generate it should be included. But
if I remember correctly, I had to regenerate this file as it produces a
they're out there:
http://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/modpython/win/3.2.8/
On Tue, 21 Feb 2006, Nicolas Lehuen wrote:
Hi Grisha,
Could you also put the Win32 binaries and make sure they are
referenced on the download page ? We regularly have questions about
where those binaries are, and I
OK, sorry, I was mislead by the fact that there were 3.2.5b binaries
in the dist directory.
Regards,
Nicolas
2006/2/21, Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
they're out there:
http://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/modpython/win/3.2.8/
On Tue, 21 Feb 2006, Nicolas Lehuen wrote:
Hi
Graham Dumpleton wrote:
On 21/02/2006, at 7:08 AM, Jim Gallacher wrote:
The Apache 2.2 support will likely go into the 3.2.9 bugfix release.
We just wanted to get the security problem out of the way first.
Jim, if we are again going to aim for a bug rollup release for 3.2.9 do I
need to
Nice summary.
+1 for the change.
Jim
Graham Dumpleton wrote:
Jim Gallacher wrote ..
I don't have alot more to say on these last 2 emails. I think you are on
the right path here.
Okay, I think I have a good plan now.
To summarise the whole issue, the way Apache treats multiple handlers in
If I understand this correctly, then +1.
...though I'm wondering if anyone will actually try to do something as
arcane as dynamicaly registering non-content handers? :-)
Grisha
On Tue, 21 Feb 2006, Jim Gallacher wrote:
Nice summary.
+1 for the change.
Jim
Graham Dumpleton wrote:
Jim
Grisha wrote ..
If I understand this correctly, then +1.
...though I'm wondering if anyone will actually try to do something as
arcane as dynamicaly registering non-content handers? :-)
I agree, it might not be a totally realistic scenario, but then now that
I have checked in a change to
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On 2/19/06, Jim Gallacher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just notice that a few files still say that mod_python uses Apache
License 1.1 (eg htdocs/tests.py, src/psp_string.c). Can I assume this is
an error and that *everything* should be version 2.0?
Yes. -- justin
Jim Gallacher wrote ..
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On 2/19/06, Jim Gallacher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just notice that a few files still say that mod_python uses Apache
License 1.1 (eg htdocs/tests.py, src/psp_string.c). Can I assume this
is
an error and that *everything* should be
+1
Excellent summary, Graham.
Maybe we could ask on the mod_pyhon mailing list who is stacking
non-content handlers, especially if registered dynamically, and for
what purpose ? This way we could make sure that no one actually relies
on the current cludgy behaviour.
But I agree with you, it's
On 2/21/06, Graham Dumpleton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Technically speaking, if you make a change to the file, you should be
ensuring you add the current years date. Ie., not replace it. Thus,
presuming no changes were made in 2005, you would have:
* Copyright 2004, 2006 Apache Software
I get failing tests on WinXP-sp2, apache 2.0.54, python 2.4.2.
This may be because the test suite is looking for things not there yet.
Put the 3.2.8 binary distribution on my system and did a svn update to
get the latest test suite. When running the tests, I got the following
failures (can we
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von:
Serf's mailing list is at:
http://mailman.webdav.org/mailman/listinfo/serf-dev/
(You'll find some familiar faces posting there. *duck*)
Thanks for the hints. I see it is a low traffic mailing list :-).
I hope to find time to have a look into
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON-129?page=comments#action_12367169
]
Graham Dumpleton commented on MODPYTHON-129:
From a bit of discussion on mailing list, have come to conclusion that how
content handlers are treated should
Hi!
Is there any reason for holding back the official Win32 port of
Apache2.2? Why isn't it still published?
Can anybody give me a short hint?
Sierk
Sierk Bornemann | Hannover | Germany
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
URL: http://www.sierkbornemann.de/
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Joe Orton
The regression test runs last night had between zero and
three failures
in t/ssl/proxy.t in various builds (timing dependent, I guess); the
build which had three failures was:
So that seems to be related to the other issue we
On Tuesday 21 February 2006 09:49, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-02-21 10:49
--- I have opened Red Hat's bugzilla case and ask RH to back
port your patch into RH's.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176663
Then RH's
And as a side-note - let's not highjack the vote thread. :-)
(For anyone who does not understand what this means - it's when you take
a message on the list and hit reply-to and post something not relevant to
the message you're replying to so then it will appear as the continuation
of the
Resolved, the files have been placed on www.apache.org/dist, allowing time
for mirror sync, then the web page update, then an announcement.
Grisha
On Mon, 20 Feb 2006, Graham Dumpleton wrote:
+1 core vote
Nicolas Lehuen wrote ..
+1 core vote
2006/2/20, Jim Gallacher [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi Grisha,
Could you also put the Win32 binaries and make sure they are
referenced on the download page ? We regularly have questions about
where those binaries are, and I end up serving the files from my
personal hosting solution, which is not really tailored for that.
You can find the binaries
On Tuesday 21 February 2006 14:56, Joe Orton wrote:
I've prepared a (simpler) alternative patch, which fixes the real
issue and will make packages available for testing.
Sure, it's a better fix to the particular example that was posted. But
that's only because that example was a
The line PidFile logs/httpd.pid used to exist in all versions Apache
HTTP Server prior to 2.2.0 version.
Any specific reason as to why this was removed from httpd.conf for
Apache 2.2.0 version? I could not get the details in the release
documentation.
Thanks,
Thomas
Vengal, Thomas (OpenViewRD) wrote:
The line PidFile logs/httpd.pid used to exist in all versions Apache
HTTP Server prior to 2.2.0 version.
Any specific reason as to why this was removed from httpd.conf for
Apache 2.2.0 version? I could not get the details in the release
documentation.
It was
25 matches
Mail list logo
