Hi,
I have an error log full of these;
[Thu Jul 07 00:15:58.010625 2011] [mpm_winnt:warn] [pid 2840:tid 1572]
(OS 64)The specified network name is no longer available. :
winnt_accept: Asynchronous AcceptEx failed.
Thanks to Steffen's bringing this up, I now know how I should be fixing
I think the issues with AcceptFilter http/s none should first be solved, my
feeling says it is relating too.
See also the post from Gregg today with subject
Windows 2.3.13 :: Win32DisableAcceptEx.
He suffers same kind of issues.
Steffen
- Original Message -
From: Stefan Fritsch
Only presently available options are available as choices to end this
now unproductive discussion [any heretofore unseen complete abstration
of ldap cannot be considered with no patches offered]. This vote is
limited to the scope of the httpd project and expresses a preference,
there is no
On 7/6/2011 6:07 PM, Graham Leggett wrote:
I have vetoed the mess you've just referred to, and I expect wrowe to revert
this change
as per this project's rules.
Per the project rules, you have failed to offer a valid technical
justification for your veto. It represents an opinion. Right
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:55 PM, William A. Rowe Jr.
wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
Only presently available options are available as choices to end this
now unproductive discussion [any heretofore unseen complete abstration
of ldap cannot be considered with no patches offered]. This vote is
On 7/7/2011 12:14 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
[ ] Move ap_ldap API's to yet another mod_ldaps[1] module
(binding both mod_ldap and mod_ldaps to ldap libs)
IIUC, the only benefit (and a great one) to yet another ldap shared
library (whether mod_foo or in apr) is if there is a complete
On 7 Jul 2011, at 17:55, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
[ ] Retain ap_ldap API's in httpd 2.3 mod_ldap, as currently in trunk
(binding mod_ldap to ldap libs)
+1. But get it right: not a botch job just because there's
pressure to release. Should really have been alpha rather
On Jul 7, 2011, at 2:44 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
On 7 Jul 2011, at 17:55, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
[ ] Retain ap_ldap API's in httpd 2.3 mod_ldap, as currently in trunk
(binding mod_ldap to ldap libs)
+1. But get it right: not a botch job just because there's
pressure to
On 04 Jul 2011, at 6:48 PM, Joe Orton wrote:
It's incumbent on you to provide specific technical objections if
vetoing code, not this hand-waving objections must exist because of
X.
I have already done so. If you disagree with the objection, or do not
understand the objection, engage the
On 07 Jul 2011, at 10:51 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Jul 7, 2011, at 2:44 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
On 7 Jul 2011, at 17:55, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
[ ] Retain ap_ldap API's in httpd 2.3 mod_ldap, as currently in
trunk
(binding mod_ldap to ldap libs)
+1. But get it right: not a
On 7/7/2011 5:16 PM, Graham Leggett wrote:
On 07 Jul 2011, at 10:51 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Jul 7, 2011, at 2:44 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
On 7 Jul 2011, at 17:55, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
[ ] Retain ap_ldap API's in httpd 2.3 mod_ldap, as currently in trunk
(binding mod_ldap to ldap
On 7/7/2011 1:44 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
On 7 Jul 2011, at 17:55, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
[ ] Retain ap_ldap API's in httpd 2.3 mod_ldap, as currently in trunk
(binding mod_ldap to ldap libs)
+1. But get it right: not a botch job just because there's
pressure to release.
On 25 Jun 2011, at 21:11, Graham Leggett wrote:
This is not so, to fix this, you would need to wrap every single LDAP API
function call[1] in an optional function, and if you did that, you would
solve the problem that caused you to want to remove apr_ldap from APR in the
first place,
On 7/7/2011 9:10 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
I am therefore vetoing this move of apr_ldap from APR to httpd.
Hang on! How long ago did this move happen, and when did you
first raise concerns?
His first attempt at vetoing this change was in 2009, accompanied
by an assertion that he would address
Starting a fresh thread to identify the actual issues that are blocking
the 2.3.13-beta, along with fresh checkouts and build trees...
I immediately noticed that it's confusing that --enable-authnz-ldap etc
don't work without --with-ldap. What configuration logic could make this
all easier for
I have a mod_perl based module running a service on an openVZ slice.
It was working fine for a few weeks, but when I went to use it today I
get delivered an empty page and in the apache error.log:
child exit signal Illegal instruction (4)
Which AFAIK is a very strange thing (SIGILL); actual perl
On Thu, 7 Jul 2011 10:33:59 -0400
MK m...@cognitivedissonance.ca wrote:
Same thing. Ie, suddenly perl modules are working. I did not compile
apache or mod_perl myself.
Sorry, that should read suddenly perl modules are NOT working,
hopefully that was not too confusing ;)
--
Enthusiasm is not
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 02:56, Jodi Bosa jodib...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to leverage mod_proxy and mod_proxy_http to proxy client
requests (from another protocol).
Assuming I have input output filters that handle the other protocol with
the client, shouldn't I simply be able to:
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 16:33, MK m...@cognitivedissonance.ca wrote:
I have a mod_perl based module running a service on an openVZ slice.
It was working fine for a few weeks, but when I went to use it today I
get delivered an empty page and in the apache error.log:
child exit signal Illegal
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Ben Noordhuis i...@bnoordhuis.nl wrote:
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 02:56, Jodi Bosa jodib...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to leverage mod_proxy and mod_proxy_http to proxy client
requests (from another protocol).
Assuming I have input output filters that handle
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 07:19, Jodi Bosa jodib...@gmail.com wrote:
It seems I may need to create HTTPS reverse proxy workers DYNAMICALLY - what
is best way to do this?
In other words, from manual I see config directive:
ProxyPass /example http://backend.example.com connectiontimeout=5
21 matches
Mail list logo
