Jim I just now found out that the atomics problem for event also happens
on Linux 32 Bits using GCC. At least it does on SuSE Linux Enterprise 10
32 Bits with platform standard gcc 4.1.0.
I can confirm that SLES11 SP2+3 with 32 Bit is also affected.
gcc version 4.3.4 [gcc-4_3-branch revision
Switching mailing list from users to dev becazse to me this does not appear
to be a configuration problem. Anyone care to give a hint ?
-- Forwarded message --
From: Thomas Eckert thomas.r.w.eck...@gmail.com
Date: Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 9:36 AM
Subject: Re: unsetting encrypted
On 25 Nov 2013, at 2:43 PM, Thomas Eckert thomas.r.w.eck...@gmail.com wrote:
Switching mailing list from users to dev becazse to me this does not appear
to be a configuration problem. Anyone care to give a hint ?
and redirecting the user back to the form page again and again. I don't see a
Thanks but I'm no sure if that's what I am looking for. I want to get rid
of the old sessions (with the old key) and replace them with new ones (with
the new key). For me, that's pretty much invalidating them but I think
the docs mean something different with (
I've added a test to APR-1.5 and trunk so see if apr_atomic_add32
acts as expected when adding a negative number...
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 2:59 PM, j...@apache.org wrote:
Author: jim
Date: Mon Nov 25 13:59:06 2013
New Revision: 1545286
URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1545286
Log:
Use a normalized offset point for idlers... still need to worry
that atomics work as expected, in this case that a add32 of a
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
Index: server/mpm/event/fdqueue.c
===
--- server/mpm/event/fdqueue.c(revision 1545301)
+++ server/mpm/event/fdqueue.c(working copy)
@@ -17,7 +17,7
On Nov 25, 2013, at 10:24 AM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
As Jeff said in the other thread, I think the test here should be :
if (prev_idlers = 1)
that's because dec32 was returning the new value while add32 now returns the
old one (fetch_and_sub vs sub_and_fetch).
We
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Thomas Eckert
thomas.r.w.eck...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks but I'm no sure if that's what I am looking for. I want to get rid of
the old sessions (with the old key) and replace them with new ones (with the
new key).
Firstly, (ISTM) you want to preserve the
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Nov 25, 2013, at 10:24 AM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
As Jeff said in the other thread, I think the test here should be :
if (prev_idlers = 1)
that's because dec32 was returning the new value
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
(Note the int prev_idlers = apr_int32_t prev_idlers too in the patch,
should int be larger than int32_t, eg. with 64bits int, prev_idlers would
not become negative is this case...).
Just to illustrate, suppose
If I have misunderstood, and you simply want all the old cookies
ignored and/or removed, then just list the new key by itself, the old
cookies will not be considered at all - I'm not sure if the invalid
cookie is deleted or not..
That's *exactly* what I want: get rid of the old cookies,
On 25 Nov 2013, at 7:30 PM, Thomas Eckert thomas.r.w.eck...@gmail.com wrote:
If I have misunderstood, and you simply want all the old cookies
ignored and/or removed, then just list the new key by itself, the old
cookies will not be considered at all - I'm not sure if the invalid
cookie is
On Nov 25, 2013, at 11:53 AM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Nov 25, 2013, at 10:24 AM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
As Jeff said in the other thread, I think the test here should be :
if
On Nov 25, 2013, at 11:53 AM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
Indeed, that was not consistent!
This is a second fix then, the check was doubly broken...
I'm not sure...
On Nov 24, 2013, at 7:18 PM, Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 5:39 PM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
Couldn't ap_queue_info_try_get_idler() and the event_pre_config() check use :
prev_idlers = apr_atomic_add32((apr_uint32_t *)(queue_info-idlers),
On Nov 25, 2013, at 1:09 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Nov 25, 2013, at 11:53 AM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Nov 25, 2013, at 10:24 AM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
As
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Nov 24, 2013, at 7:18 PM, Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 5:39 PM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com
wrote:
Couldn't ap_queue_info_try_get_idler() and the event_pre_config() check
use :
I am wanting to leave the additions I have done (which are not known to any
clean option) and compare that with
a) the latest TR
b) the latest trunk
Is there a clean that goes farther than make distclean (i.e., to even
undo whatever buildconf is going to do).
Thanks,
Michael
Upon review, using unsigned makes a lot of sense, so I'll
start the adjustment from apr_int32_t and simple ints
to apr_uint32_t.
On Nov 25, 2013, at 1:40 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Nov 25, 2013, at 1:09 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Nov 25, 2013, at 11:53
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 8:39 PM, Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com wrote:
Let's move this to dev@httpd and omit dev@apr (after this e-mail)...
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 8:28 AM, olli hauer oha...@gmx.de wrote:
On 2013-11-22 00:08, Jeff Trawick wrote:
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 5:48 PM, olli hauer
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Michael Felt mamf...@gmail.com wrote:
I am wanting to leave the additions I have done (which are not known to
any clean option) and compare that with
a) the latest TR
b) the latest trunk
Is there a clean that goes farther than make distclean (i.e., to even
Am 25.11.2013 21:49, schrieb Michael Felt:
I am wanting to leave the additions I have done (which are not known to any
clean option) and compare that with
a) the latest TR
b) the latest trunk
Is there a clean that goes farther than make distclean (i.e., to even undo
whatever buildconf
On 2013-11-25 22:14, Jeff Trawick wrote:
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 8:39 PM, Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com wrote:
Let's move this to dev@httpd and omit dev@apr (after this e-mail)...
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 8:28 AM, olli hauer oha...@gmx.de wrote:
On 2013-11-22 00:08, Jeff Trawick wrote:
well, know I know - ran make distclean a few moments too soon.
btw - I thought that we had also shifted to apr-util-1.5.x on httpd-2.2.x
(but I am probably mistaken).
I ask because I got this reminder from buildconf.
So, I shall assume my memory is bad, and get the latest offficial
It appears that our SNI hostname comparison is invalid for forward proxy
applications, specifically proxy CONNECT. RFC 2616 states;
14.23 Host
The Host request-header field specifies the Internet host and port
number of the resource being requested, as obtained from the original
URI
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 4:28 PM, olli hauer oha...@gmx.de wrote:
On 2013-11-25 22:14, Jeff Trawick wrote:
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 8:39 PM, Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com wrote:
Let's move this to dev@httpd and omit dev@apr (after this e-mail)...
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 8:28 AM, olli
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 4:28 PM, olli hauer oha...@gmx.de wrote:
On 2013-11-25 22:14, Jeff Trawick wrote:
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 8:39 PM, Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com
wrote:
Let's move this to dev@httpd and omit
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 7:10 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Nov 25, 2013, at 11:53 AM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
Indeed, that was not consistent!
This is a second fix then, the check was doubly broken...
I'm not sure...
Yes, APR_EAGAIN is all workers
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 7:40 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Nov 25, 2013, at 1:09 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Nov 25, 2013, at 11:53 AM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On
Under the assumption that the httpd-2.2.X branch is suppossed to be runninf
under the apr*-1.4.X branches I am rebuilding all from scratch and
including make check.
With apr-1.4.8 on AIX I am getting an error - testsock returns 1-of 9
errors.
More difficult for me is the apr-util make check
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Michael Felt mamf...@gmail.com wrote:
Under the assumption that the httpd-2.2.X branch is suppossed to be
runninf under the apr*-1.4.X branches I am rebuilding all from scratch and
including make check.
httpd 2.2.x works with apr/apr-util 1.4.x or 1.5.x
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:55 PM, William A. Rowe Jr.
wr...@rowe-clan.netwrote:
It appears that our SNI hostname comparison is invalid for forward proxy
applications, specifically proxy CONNECT. RFC 2616 states;
14.23 Host
The Host request-header field specifies the Internet host and
On 26.11.2013 00:46, Yann Ylavic wrote:
Ideas for the appropriate patch to httpd? Scope this fix to CONNECT
requests alone, or all forward proxy requests?
Maybe all forward proxy modules are concerned.
There is PR
55782
which I started to debug but did not finish (run out of time).
From
34 matches
Mail list logo
