On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 18:23:18 -0500
Jeff Trawick wrote:
> or am I missing something?
>
> Is it too disruptive to fix for 2.4?
Well, we *could* just dispense with it, and let modules
retrieve optional functions in a hook of their choice
such as post_config.
Are you looking to a radical change to
or am I missing something?
Is it too disruptive to fix for 2.4?
On Feb 10, 2011, at 2:05 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 12:05 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> Yeah... I need to check my merge script and figure out why
>> it does that.
>>
>> Sorry...
>
> Thanks :) BTW, Joe's svn.merge seems to work fine.
>
But his doesn't handle cases wher
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 12:05 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Yeah... I need to check my merge script and figure out why
> it does that.
>
> Sorry...
Thanks :) BTW, Joe's svn.merge seems to work fine.
On 2/10/2011 7:24 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> PROXY_DECLARE(apr_status_t) ap_proxy_update_members is what I
> want and what I meant.
Modules should not be exporting functions, they should be registering
optional functions at the reg phase, other modules picking them up
if available in their config
On 2/10/2011 9:34 AM, Lars Eilebrecht wrote:
> Issac Goldstand wrote:
>> Am I getting senile, or didn't we vote on making 1.3 End-Of-Life
>> already? If so, why is 1.3.42 still featured on our download page as a
>> "current recommended release" a year later? Isn't it time to change
>> that to a n
Hi Jim,
r1069381 works, thank you.
Cheers,
Gregg
-Original Message-
From: Jim Jagielski
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 08:24:12 -0500
Subject: Re: mod_proxy_balancer build failure
PROXY_DECLARE(apr_status_t) ap_proxy_update_members is what I
want and what I meant.
On
Yeah... I need to check my merge script and figure out why
it does that.
Sorry...
On Feb 10, 2011, at 11:01 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:29 AM, wrote:
>> Author: jim
>> Date: Thu Feb 10 15:29:07 2011
>> New Revision: 1069428
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=
I am as well. WARN sounds good.
Regards
Rüdiger
> -Original Message-
> From: Jim Jagielski
> Sent: Mittwoch, 9. Februar 2011 16:40
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Subject: Re: mod_reqtimeout logging
>
> I'd be +1 on moving it higher...
>
> On Feb 9, 2011, at 10:28 AM, Nick Gearls wrote:
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 3:46 PM, Eric Covener wrote:
Is there a specifically different way to handle Content Handlers on
Windows? I am now looking at this:
>>>
>>> No.
>>
>> So what you are trying to tell me is, that there must be a fault in
>> mod_ruby.so itself? Or is this a configurat
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:29 AM, wrote:
> Author: jim
> Date: Thu Feb 10 15:29:07 2011
> New Revision: 1069428
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1069428&view=rev
> Log:
> *) prefork: Update MPM state in children during a graceful restart.
> Allow the HTTP connection handling loop
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 10:28 AM, Nick Gearls wrote:
> Hello,
>
> When an attack (timeout) is detected, it is logged at the info level.
> Shouldn't this be considered as a warning?
Counters would be nice for this since you want to know something about
the big picture before worrying about it.
Rea
Issac Goldstand wrote:
> Am I getting senile, or didn't we vote on making 1.3 End-Of-Life
> already? If so, why is 1.3.42 still featured on our download page as a
> "current recommended release" a year later? Isn't it time to change
> that to a note saying something to the extent of "If you absol
Am I getting senile, or didn't we vote on making 1.3 End-Of-Life
already? If so, why is 1.3.42 still featured on our download page as a
"current recommended release" a year later? Isn't it time to change
that to a note saying something to the extent of "If you absolutely MUST
continue using 1.3,
Dear Eric
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 3:46 PM, Eric Covener wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Zeno Davatz wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Eric Covener wrote:
Is there a specifically different way to handle Content Handlers on
Windows? I am now looking at this:
>>>
>>>
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Zeno Davatz wrote:
> Dear Eric
>
> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Eric Covener wrote:
>>> Is there a specifically different way to handle Content Handlers on
>>> Windows? I am now looking at this:
>>
>> No.
>
> So what you are trying to tell me is, that there mu
Dear Eric
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Eric Covener wrote:
>> Is there a specifically different way to handle Content Handlers on
>> Windows? I am now looking at this:
>
> No.
So what you are trying to tell me is, that there must be a fault in
mod_ruby.so itself? Or is this a configuration i
Let's commit to pushing for a 2.3.11-BETA...
> Is there a specifically different way to handle Content Handlers on
> Windows? I am now looking at this:
No.
Dear Eric
Thank you for your reply.
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Eric Covener wrote:
>> Now I do not yet understand if that has any meaning or not.
>
> It means your mod_ruby can't act as a handler, the piece which
> actually generates the response for a request. This is why it only
> seem
> Now I do not yet understand if that has any meaning or not.
It means your mod_ruby can't act as a handler, the piece which
actually generates the response for a request. This is why it only
seems to work when you configure your windows system to run ruby
scripts as CGI -- but it's not actually
PROXY_DECLARE(apr_status_t) ap_proxy_update_members is what I
want and what I meant.
On Feb 9, 2011, at 11:07 PM, Gregg L. Smith wrote:
> Hi Jim,
>
> Thank you, yet I'm more concerned about the former one honestly as it's a
> no-go.
>
> I looked up the error and you can not declare a function
Dear Günter
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Guenter Knauf wrote:
> Am 10.02.2011 09:48, schrieb Zeno Davatz:
>>
>> It seems that Apache for Windows interprets vhosts.conf files
>> differently then Apache for Linux does. I am asking this question
>> related to mod_ruby. Both Apaches (Linux and
On 2/10/2011 2:21 AM, Nick Gearls wrote:
Probably not, but as we specify the time-outs to allow all normal
requests (we hope), I'd like to be warned when an attack occurs, but
also if one of my genuine customers is blocked (to possibly fine-tunes
the time-outs).
We should figure out what the ge
Am 08.02.2011 21:23, schrieb William A. Rowe Jr.:
Hi Carsten, you've certainly found dev@ worthy flaws :)
Hi William, I guess I should move my problem with mod_fcgid also to
dev@? But first some more infos about mod_ftp...
command.log:
| anonymous [::1] RETR /
| anonymous [::1] RETR /te
Dear Günter
Thanks for the reply.
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Guenter Knauf wrote:
> Am 10.02.2011 09:48, schrieb Zeno Davatz:
>>
>> It seems that Apache for Windows interprets vhosts.conf files
>> differently then Apache for Linux does. I am asking this question
>> related to mod_ruby. B
Hi Zeno,
Am 10.02.2011 09:48, schrieb Zeno Davatz:
It seems that Apache for Windows interprets vhosts.conf files
differently then Apache for Linux does. I am asking this question
related to mod_ruby. Both Apaches (Linux and Windows) start fine with
mod_ruby.so loaded.
This vhosts.conf file on Li
Hi
It seems that Apache for Windows interprets vhosts.conf files
differently then Apache for Linux does. I am asking this question
related to mod_ruby. Both Apaches (Linux and Windows) start fine with
mod_ruby.so loaded.
This vhosts.conf file on Linux Apache 2.2.14-r1 works just fine. Ruby
is exe
Probably not, but as we specify the time-outs to allow all normal
requests (we hope), I'd like to be warned when an attack occurs, but
also if one of my genuine customers is blocked (to possibly fine-tunes
the time-outs).
Another option would be to set an environment variable, so I could check
On 2/9/2011 10:07 PM, Gregg L. Smith wrote:
> Hi Jim,
>
> Thank you, yet I'm more concerned about the former one honestly as it's a
> no-go.
>
> I looked up the error and you can not declare a function internal to the dll
> as a dll import. Because of PROXY_DECLARE the function gets an import t
30 matches
Mail list logo
