> I am running a Tru64 Cluster and I believe there is a design conflict between the
> error checking in the code for the Include directive and Cluster application set up
> on Tru64.
>
> For people who are not familiar with Tru64 clustering there is a feature called a
> CDSL (Context Dependant
At 09:00 PM 11/20/2003, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
>>We need to axe or decorate the symbol NO_USE_SIGACTION in our
>>ongoing effort to prevent namespace clashes.
>
>sounds good
>
>>We do have a flag APR_HAVE_SIGACTION which is tested and
>>configured for, and the attached pa
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
We need to axe or decorate the symbol NO_USE_SIGACTION in our
ongoing effort to prevent namespace clashes.
sounds good
We do have a flag APR_HAVE_SIGACTION which is tested and
configured for, and the attached patch to the Apache MPMs
presumes that this was the intent
making public per Madhu
MATHIHALLI,MADHUSUDAN (HP-Cupertino,ex1) wrote:
I'm using 2.0.48 and also back-ported the cgid-restart patch to 2.0.48. I
got a little further on the issue : The Apache hang is definitely caused by
the cgid exiting.
cgid should _never_ exit without something in the error lo
* Brian Akins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
>
> > * Replace some of the mutex locking in the worker MPM with
> > atomic operations for higher concurrency.
> > server/mpm/worker/fdqueue.c 1.24, 1.25
> > +1: brianp
>
> Is anyone working on this ri
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
> +1 for 1.3 - we made this change already for 2.0 when we encountered
> the problem (as we ship mod_ssl in 2.0, but not in 1.3).
>
> I found it interesting that you retained %c - I presume this means that
> %c continues to work until mod_ssl replaces it's meaning?
>
+1 for 1.3 - we made this change already for 2.0 when we encountered
the problem (as we ship mod_ssl in 2.0, but not in 1.3).
I found it interesting that you retained %c - I presume this means that
%c continues to work until mod_ssl replaces it's meaning?
Bill
At 02:16 PM 11/20/2003, you wrote:
Jeff Trawick wrote:
>
> You may be on shaky ground there, Jim. At the hackathon, I suggested an
> interesting feature for 1.3 to one of those disenfranchised 1.3 developers* and
> was asked "Why do you want to mess with 1.3?" :) From our discussion, he
> clearly was ready for 1.3 to fade away
Jim Jagielski wrote:
This has been itching me for awhile... I don't like loosing
%c whenever mod_ssl is in the mix. This is basically a
feature (yes, I said it, a feature)
You may be on shaky ground there, Jim. At the hackathon, I suggested an
interesting feature for 1.3 to one of those disenfr
This has been itching me for awhile... I don't like loosing
%c whenever mod_ssl is in the mix. This is basically a
feature (yes, I said it, a feature) from 2.0 that makes sense
in 1.3. The other logable items would be nice as
well (%C) but this is core, I think.
The other cruft is simply to put th
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> stoddard2003/11/20 11:44:19
>
> Modified:.CHANGES
>server/mpm/winnt child.c mpm.h
> Log:
> Win32: Make Win32 MPM transaction pools honor MaxMemFree
There's a very small doc change needed here too. (Just add
mpm
We need to axe or decorate the symbol NO_USE_SIGACTION in our
ongoing effort to prevent namespace clashes.
However, this turned out to be a nontrival problem. It doesn't appear
that this option was ever a tunable APR option.
We do have a flag APR_HAVE_SIGACTION which is tested and
configured for
Bill Stoddard wrote:
Brian Akins wrote:
Matthieu Estrade wrote:
mod_cache is not caching / because of negotiate problem, if i
remember well.
We discuss many times to why not caching, and never find really a
good reason to not cache /.
I see this in mod_cache.c
/* DECLINE urls ending in / ???
Jim Jagielski a écrit :
Henri Gomez wrote:
These are (should be) non-fatal...
What gcc are you using ('gcc_select')?
stock gcc 3.3 which came with devtools
Did you confirm that 'httpd' isn't, in fact, created?
What's the 'recommanded' configure options for OS/X ?
Thanks
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
* Replace some of the mutex locking in the worker MPM with
atomic operations for higher concurrency.
server/mpm/worker/fdqueue.c 1.24, 1.25
+1: brianp
Is anyone working on this right now? If not, this is of some interest
to me.
--
Brian Akins
Jim Jagielski a écrit :
Henri Gomez wrote:
These are (should be) non-fatal...
What gcc are you using ('gcc_select')?
stock gcc 3.3 which came with devtools
Did you confirm that 'httpd' isn't, in fact, created?
No it's created and installed in /usr/local/apache2, but wonder about
this error c
Henri Gomez wrote:
>
> >
> > These are (should be) non-fatal...
> >
> > What gcc are you using ('gcc_select')?
> >
>
> stock gcc 3.3 which came with devtools
>
Did you confirm that 'httpd' isn't, in fact, created?
--
=
Jim Jagielski a écrit :
Henri Gomez wrote:
/Users/hgo/httpd-2.0.48/srclib/pcre/libpcre.la
/Users/hgo/httpd-2.0.48/srclib/apr-util/libaprutil-0.la
/Users/hgo/httpd-2.0.48/srclib/apr-util/xml/expat/lib/libexpat.la
-liconv /Users/hgo/httpd-2.0.48/srclib/apr/libapr-0.la -lresolv
ld: warning multip
Henri Gomez wrote:
>
> /Users/hgo/httpd-2.0.48/srclib/pcre/libpcre.la
> /Users/hgo/httpd-2.0.48/srclib/apr-util/libaprutil-0.la
> /Users/hgo/httpd-2.0.48/srclib/apr-util/xml/expat/lib/libexpat.la
> -liconv /Users/hgo/httpd-2.0.48/srclib/apr/libapr-0.la -lresolv
> ld: warning multiple definition
Folks with outstanding patches or new patches in the works:
Please follow the guidelines at http://httpd.apache.org/dev/patches.html
The biggest change is that we ask people to submit patches via the bug
database. Some people have been doing this already, but many patches were
posted only to t
Did someone succeed to build 2.0.48 on MacOS X 10.3 (Jaguar) ?
I does :
./configure
make
...
/Users/hgo/httpd-2.0.48/srclib/apr/libtool --silent --mode=compile gcc
-g -O2-DDARWIN -DSIGPROCMASK_SETS_THREAD_MASK -no-cpp-precomp
-DAP_HAVE_DESIGNATED_INITIALIZER
-I/Users/hgo/httpd-2.0.48/srcl
* "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> NOOO
;-)
> seriously this option is too overloaded as it is. Let's try to
> leave boolean flags in IndexOptions, but create new directive names if
> they are non-trival choices.
>>IndexOptions CSS=/foo/bar.css
Hmm. What about *width,
NOOO
seriously this option is too overloaded as it is. Let's try to leave boolean
flags in IndexOptions, but create new directive names if they are non-trival
choices.
Bill
At 01:47 AM 11/20/2003, André Malo wrote:
>* "Paul Querna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 07:1
> André Malo wrote:
>> * "Paul Querna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 07:18:55 +0100, André Malo wrote
>>>
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> mod_autoindex: new directive IndexStyleSheet
Hmm, why not new IndexOption? Isn't that what Indexoptions are
André Malo wrote:
* "Paul Querna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 07:18:55 +0100, André Malo wrote
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
mod_autoindex: new directive IndexStyleSheet
Hmm, why not new IndexOption? Isn't that what Indexoptions are for?
You mean somthing like:
IndexOpion Sty
* "Paul Querna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 07:18:55 +0100, André Malo wrote
> > * [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > mod_autoindex: new directive IndexStyleSheet
> >
> > Hmm, why not new IndexOption? Isn't that what Indexoptions are for?
> >
>
> You mean somthing like:
26 matches
Mail list logo