I've gone through and cleaned up all bug entries done since
Feburary. Hopefully, we can try to triage them and address
any 2.0-related ones soon. I would please ask that all
developers take a few minutes to look over these bugs and see
if they can help us close them out.
Top problems that I
At 02:18 AM 2/27/2002, you wrote:
I've gone through and cleaned up all bug entries done since
Feburary. Hopefully, we can try to triage them and address
any 2.0-related ones soon. I would please ask that all
developers take a few minutes to look over these bugs and see
if they can help us close
At 09:36 AM 2/27/2002, you wrote:
At 02:18 AM 2/27/2002, you wrote:
1) Win32 doesn't install as service correctly [9863, 9914, 9961]
Yes - it also wiped out the HKLM\microsoft\windows\current version\run
key upon uninstallation.
I've pulled the msi into our /dist/httpd/binaries/win32/.old for
* Justin Erenkrantz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
--
Number: 9952
Category: mod_jserv
Synopsis: Cannot load tomcat connection module
Arrival-Date: Mon Feb 25 07:10:01 PST 2002
Release:2.0.32
In regards to Pier's message about 1.3 jserv bugs being reassigned to
On Wed, Feb 27, 2002 at 04:44:03PM +, Thom May wrote:
* Justin Erenkrantz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
--
Number: 9952
Category: mod_jserv
Synopsis: Cannot load tomcat connection module
Arrival-Date: Mon Feb 25 07:10:01 PST 2002
Release:2.0.32
In
On Wed, Feb 27, 2002 at 04:44:03PM +, Thom May wrote:
* Justin Erenkrantz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
--
Number: 9952
Category: mod_jserv
Synopsis: Cannot load tomcat connection module
Arrival-Date: Mon Feb 25 07:10:01 PST 2002
Release:2.0.32
At 12:03 PM 02/27/2002, Ryan Bloom wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2002 at 04:44:03PM +, Thom May wrote:
However, that brings up a point:
Can we detect when a 1.3 module will be used with 2.0? One of my
housemates was trying to install the PHP 1.3 module with 2.0.32 on
Win32 last night.
On Wed, Feb 27, 2002 at 12:20:51PM -0500, Greg Marr wrote:
Not on Windows. You will not be able to even load the module. The
LoadLibrary call will fail, since the module is linked against
functions that don't exist. That is a standard system error message
from using LoadLibrary to load
On Wed, Feb 27, 2002 at 09:32:34AM -0800, Aaron Bannert wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2002 at 12:20:51PM -0500, Greg Marr wrote:
Not on Windows. You will not be able to even load the module. The
LoadLibrary call will fail, since the module is linked against
functions that don't exist. That
In that case we should simply make the error more descriptive:
Failed to load module. Perhaps this module was compiled for Apache
1.3?
Ugh. Then, +1 for Aaron's comment.
A Failed to load message of any kind is MUCH better than module not
found, as that leads to thinking that the FILE
At 12:23 PM 2/27/2002, Jobarr wrote:
In that case we should simply make the error more descriptive:
Failed to load module. Perhaps this module was compiled for Apache
1.3?
Ugh. Then, +1 for Aaron's comment.
A Failed to load message of any kind is MUCH better than module not
found,
11 matches
Mail list logo
