Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.2.32

2017-01-11 Thread Gregg Smith
On 1/9/2017 10:21 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: The pre-release candidate tarballs of Apache legacy httpd 2.2.32 can be found in; http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ Thanks to all for patches and reviews to get us to this point. STATUS file is updated to reflect end of maintenance Jul 1 '17.

[VOTE] Release httpd-2.2.32

2017-01-11 Thread Bojan Smojver
[+1] Release 2.2.32 as legacy GA Built RPMs on RHEL6 using my own spec file, derived from Red Hat's. Appears to run fine on x86_64. Non-binding etc. -- Bojan

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.2.32

2017-01-11 Thread Jacob Perkins
+1, Tested on CentOS 6.8 64bit on cPanel systems. — Jacob Perkins Product Owner cPanel Inc. jacob.perk...@cpanel.net Office: 713-529-0800 x 4046 Cell: 713-560-8655 > On Jan 9, 2017, at 12:21 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > The

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.2.32

2017-01-11 Thread William A Rowe Jr
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 10:16 AM, Dale Ghent wrote: > > Not a voting member, but dropping by to say that this is compiling and > working fine on OmniOS. Just a reminder, whether it's a binding vote or just commentary, votes from those beyond the usual suspects/PMC are

FCGI_ABORT behavior in mod-proxy-fcgi

2017-01-11 Thread Luca Toscano
Hi everybody, in https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56188 some users brought up an interesting use case for mod-proxy-fcgi, namely what it should do when a client drops its connection to httpd meanwhile the FCGI backend is still processing the request (for example, long running jobs).

Re: Host vs SNI and final dot

2017-01-11 Thread Jacob Champion
On 01/11/2017 05:51 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: Could/should we do something about this? The easier thing would be to strip the SNI to avoid AH02032 with actual browsers, we won't be less compliant than now. The hard way seems to be to let the trailing dot in r->hostname (for

Re: svn commit: r1778319 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/core/mod_watchdog.c

2017-01-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Jan 11, 2017, at 12:28 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 6:17 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >>> On Jan 11, 2017, at 12:12 PM, Joe Orton wrote: >>> The only reason why I can see why the orig idea to use

Re: svn commit: r1778319 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/core/mod_watchdog.c

2017-01-11 Thread Yann Ylavic
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 6:17 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> On Jan 11, 2017, at 12:12 PM, Joe Orton wrote: >> >>> The only reason why I can see why the orig idea to use s->process->pool >>> was to make watchdog run independent of any restarts of httpd >>>

Re: svn commit: r1778319 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/core/mod_watchdog.c

2017-01-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Jan 11, 2017, at 12:12 PM, Joe Orton wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:08:29AM -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> This is to address the following bug: >> >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1410883 > > Thanks a lot Jim! > >> The only reason why I can see

Re: svn commit: r1778319 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/core/mod_watchdog.c

2017-01-11 Thread Joe Orton
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:08:29AM -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote: > This is to address the following bug: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1410883 Thanks a lot Jim! > The only reason why I can see why the orig idea to use s->process->pool > was to make watchdog run independent of

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.2.32

2017-01-11 Thread Dale Ghent
> On Jan 9, 2017, at 1:21 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > The pre-release candidate tarballs of Apache legacy httpd 2.2.32 > can be found in; > > http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ > > Thanks to all for patches and reviews to get us to this point. > STATUS file is updated

Re: svn commit: r1778319 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/core/mod_watchdog.c

2017-01-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
This is to address the following bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1410883 The only reason why I can see why the orig idea to use s->process->pool was to make watchdog run independent of any restarts of httpd itself... that is, a truly independent watchdog. But that would imply

Re: Host vs SNI and final dot

2017-01-11 Thread Yann Ylavic
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > > Not very commonly generated by servers, this URL end up being > generated by some email clients E.g. this thread here:

Host vs SNI and final dot

2017-01-11 Thread Yann Ylavic
https://some.domain.tld./ may fail with AH02032 (400 Bad Request) because "Hostname provided via SNI and hostname provided via HTTP" differ. Not very commonly generated by servers, this URL end up being generated by some email clients (mainly on smart phones/tabs) while "interpreting" message

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.2.32

2017-01-11 Thread Yann Ylavic
On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 7:21 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > Your votes, please? [+1] Release 2.2.32 as legacy GA Tested on Debian(s) 7, 8 and 9. Sigs/SHA1/MD5 OK. All tests PASSed. Thanks Bill.

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.2.32

2017-01-11 Thread Rainer Jung
Am 09.01.2017 um 19:21 schrieb William A Rowe Jr: The pre-release candidate tarballs of Apache legacy httpd 2.2.32 can be found in; http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ Thanks to all for patches and reviews to get us to this point. STATUS file is updated to reflect end of maintenance Jul 1 '17.