Re: svn commit: r411306 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/aaa/mod_authnz_ldap.c

2006-06-03 Thread Jeff Trawick
On 6/2/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Author: bnicholes Date: Fri Jun 2 15:01:53 2006 New Revision: 411306 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=411306view=rev Log: Fix a problem with invalid auth error detection for LDAP client SDKs that don't support LDAP_SECURITY_ERROR

Apache2 Module handle naming convention

2006-06-03 Thread Paul Smedley
Hi All, I'm building Apache2 on OS/2 using GCC. On OS/2, GCC defaults to naming symbols prefaced with an underscore, ie char IMG_Load (); when compiled will be _IMG_Load. It's possible to eliminate the _ by declaring the function as type _System, ie: char _System IMG_Load (); when compiled

Re: [PATCH] setenvif filter

2006-06-03 Thread Matthieu Estrade
Brian Akins wrote: Francois PESCE wrote: I've discussed about a patch for mod_setenvif 2 years ago, and have coded it at that time, it is successfully used on various host in production since. You need to handle content type specially by checking r-content_type. For some reason, just doing

Re: svn commit: r411306 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/aaa/mod_authnz_ldap.c

2006-06-03 Thread Brad Nicholes
On 6/3/2006 at 5:45 AM, in message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Jeff Trawick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/2/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Author: bnicholes Date: Fri Jun 2 15:01:53 2006 New Revision: 411306 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=411306view=rev Log: Fix a problem

Re: [PATCH] mod_disk_cache early size-check

2006-06-03 Thread Ruediger Pluem
On 05/30/2006 12:55 PM, Niklas Edmundsson wrote: This patch takes advantage of the possibility to do the size-check of the file to be cached early. The current behaviour is to start caching the file and then bail out when it notices that it has cached more than the maximum allowed size.

PR35247: Does mod_cache violate RFC2616 because it ignores s-maxage in responses with max-age?

2006-06-03 Thread Ruediger Pluem
Can someone of our RFC experts please have a look at PR 35247 (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35247)? Questions that remain are: 1. Does the current behaviour of mod_cache really violate RFC2616? 2. If yes, does the proposed patch fix this violation? Regards RĂ¼diger