Ahh... yes, for 3rd party modules depending on mod_proxy, or
using mod_proxy, they would need to be recompiled.
Ideally, we should have put these at the end of the struct
as we do with the more "major" structs.
> On Apr 7, 2016, at 2:09 PM, Rainer Jung wrote:
>
>
> On Apr 7, 2016, at 6:55 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Rainer Jung wrote:
>> Revision 1560081 (backport of r1533087) introduced "char
>> uds_path[PROXY_WORKER_MAX_NAME_SIZE]" in the middle of the
>>
On 04/07/2016 09:36 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
> The first most important documentation of this should be in ap_mmn.h,
> as we've done in the past (you'll see some highlights).
>
> A note under the CHANGES entry for 2.4.7 seems worthwhile.
>
> Pointing this out under Announcement seems
Am 08.04.2016 um 00:55 schrieb Yann Ylavic:
On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Rainer Jung wrote:
Revision 1560081 (backport of r1533087) introduced "char
uds_path[PROXY_WORKER_MAX_NAME_SIZE]" in the middle of the
proxy_worker_shared structure which IMHO broke
On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Rainer Jung wrote:
> Revision 1560081 (backport of r1533087) introduced "char
> uds_path[PROXY_WORKER_MAX_NAME_SIZE]" in the middle of the
> proxy_worker_shared structure which IMHO broke compatibility between 2.4.6
> and 2.4.7.
Possibly
Thanks, fully agreed. I added short notes in r1738184.
Regards,
Rainer
Am 07.04.2016 um 21:36 schrieb William A Rowe Jr:
The first most important documentation of this should be in ap_mmn.h,
as we've done in the past (you'll see some highlights).
A note under the CHANGES entry for 2.4.7
The first most important documentation of this should be in ap_mmn.h,
as we've done in the past (you'll see some highlights).
A note under the CHANGES entry for 2.4.7 seems worthwhile.
Pointing this out under Announcement seems appropriate, that users
of third party mod_proxy-consuming modules
Revision 1560081 (backport of r1533087) introduced "char
uds_path[PROXY_WORKER_MAX_NAME_SIZE]" in the middle of the
proxy_worker_shared structure which IMHO broke compatibility between
2.4.6 and 2.4.7.
I noticed it just now, because I was implementing a custom LB method and
during runtime it