The mod_wsgi module for Apache that I have been talking about for a
while now is now at a point where am happy for people to start
experimenting with it. If you don't know what I am talking about,
this is a module in the same style as mod_python, which implements the
Python WSGI specification
Sorry second post, I think I used the wrong sender address the first time.
==
Hello httpd developers,
we ran into a crash on the iSeries platform with mod_jk. It turned out,
that the crash was fixed by using the pool plog instead of pconf
I'll be offline most of tomorrow and pretty much the whole
weekend. Unless I hear vetos, I'll commit the latest
mod_sed_filter.c to trunk. If we change the name, which
is fine with me, well... that's the joy of svn move :)
Hi,
I have noted that AJP proxy behaves strangely when the connection to the
browser is closed when processing the response. For example:
+++
Wed Mar 14 13:46:05 2007] [error] [client 204.136.114.10] proxy: error
processing body, referer: http://xxx.yyy.zzz/site/cart/index.html
[Wed Mar 14
Jean-Frederic wrote:
-if (status != APR_SUCCESS) {
+if (! isok) {
/* We had a failure: Close connection to backend */
conn-close++;
This is what concerns me (not your code but the old conn-close++.
Hope It wasn't me ;)
Anyhow, AJP should keep the connection to
Mladen Turk wrote:
Jean-Frederic wrote:
-if (status != APR_SUCCESS) {
+if (! isok) {
/* We had a failure: Close connection to backend */
conn-close++;
This is what concerns me (not your code but the old conn-close++.
Hope It wasn't me ;)
Caution: this line
Rainer Jung wrote:
Caution: this line exactly has been added as a patch for BZ 40310. I
didn't follow this too closely, but it looked like a serious issue for
the user.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40310
The user comments, that the fix might be relevant for mod_jk too,
On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 17:30 +0100, Rainer Jung wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
Jean-Frederic wrote:
-if (status != APR_SUCCESS) {
+if (! isok) {
/* We had a failure: Close connection to backend */
conn-close++;
This is what concerns me (not your code but the
Jim Jagielski wrote:
I'll be offline most of tomorrow and pretty much the whole
weekend. Unless I hear vetos, I'll commit the latest
mod_sed_filter.c to trunk. If we change the name, which
is fine with me, well... that's the joy of svn move :)
I was going to throw in one last beg/ for
Hi,
almost a week ago I have reported an uninitialized variable in
server/request.c. I have also filed a bug
(http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41829).
The bug is simple, the patch is simple. Why haven't I got a single reply to my
mail? The bug is also still marked as new.
On 3/15/07, Torsten Foertsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The bug is simple, the patch is simple. Why haven't I got a single reply to my
mail? The bug is also still marked as new. What is the right way to report
problems?
You're doing fine. See:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/patches.html#ignored
11 matches
Mail list logo