[STATUS] (httpd-2.1) Wed Jun 2 23:45:16 EDT 2004

2004-06-02 Thread Rodent of Unusual Size
APACHE 2.1 STATUS: -*-text-*- Last modified at [$Date: 2004/04/27 22:09:17 $] Release [NOTE that only Alpha/Beta releases occur in 2.1 development]: 2.1.0 : in development Please consult the following STATUS files for information on related proj

[STATUS] (httpd-2.0) Wed Jun 2 23:45:12 EDT 2004

2004-06-02 Thread Rodent of Unusual Size
APACHE 2.0 STATUS: -*-text-*- Last modified at [$Date: 2004/06/03 01:50:15 $] Release: 2.0.50 : in development 2.0.49 : released March 19, 2004 as GA. 2.0.48 : released October 29, 2003 as GA. 2.0.47 : released July 09, 2003 as GA.

[STATUS] (apache-1.3) Wed Jun 2 23:45:06 EDT 2004

2004-06-02 Thread Rodent of Unusual Size
APACHE 1.3 STATUS: -*-text-*- Last modified at [$Date: 2004/05/20 15:16:42 $] Release: 1.3.32-dev: In development 1.3.31: Tagged May 7, 2004. Announced May 11, 2004. 1.3.30: Tagged April 9, 2004. Not released. 1.3.29: Tagged October 24, 2

Re: Rebuilding modules.apache.org

2004-06-02 Thread Edward Rudd
On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 04:36:07 +0200, Guenter Knauf wrote: > >> We are looking for feedback on our plans. What do you want to see on a >> new modules website? What features are important to you? What hurdles >> do you see to a successfully replacement? What other audiences should >> we try to a

Re: Rebuilding modules.apache.org

2004-06-02 Thread Guenter Knauf
Hi, > Developing Modules: An area of general weakness for HTTPd is the lack of > developer documentation. The current website has a few links to mostly > outdated documents. We plan to address this audience in two thrusts. > First, provide concise tutorials by using simple modules to help people >

Rebuilding modules.apache.org

2004-06-02 Thread Paul Querna
Greetings, modules.apache.org (MAO) has housed a listing for Apache Modules for several years now. In #apache-modules on Freenode IRC we have had many discussions on how to improve the limited focus of the current MAO website. Our goal is to build a new Apache Modules website using a nati

Re: x86_64 atomics and linux

2004-06-02 Thread Brian Pane
On Jun 2, 2004, at 12:40 PM, Brian Akins wrote: AFAIK, the linux x86 atomic stuff can be used unchanged on Linux x86_64. This is based on my digging in the kernel source. All the "functions" apr uses are identical. Should I submit a patch? Sure, sounds like a good thing to add. Thanks, Brian

Re: ErrorHeader directive...

2004-06-02 Thread André Malo
* "Brad Nicholes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >If an ErrorHeader is defined, shouldn't it only be included on > non-200 http responses (ie. only on 3xx,4xx,5xx responses as the > documentation states)? No. The documentation states: | This directive can replace, merge or remove HTTP response h

ErrorHeader directive...

2004-06-02 Thread Brad Nicholes
If an ErrorHeader is defined, shouldn't it only be included on non-200 http responses (ie. only on 3xx,4xx,5xx responses as the documentation states)? With the following configuration I am seeing the ErrorHeader as well as the Header on 200 responses and only the ErrorHeader on non-200 response

x86_64 atomics and linux

2004-06-02 Thread Brian Akins
AFAIK, the linux x86 atomic stuff can be used unchanged on Linux x86_64. This is based on my digging in the kernel source. All the "functions" apr uses are identical. Should I submit a patch? -- Brian Akins Senior Systems Engineer CNN Internet Technologies

Re: NULL Pointer in auth module (Apache 2.0.48)

2004-06-02 Thread Peter Poeml
On Sat, May 22, 2004 at 04:53:12PM +0100, Dermot Tynan wrote: > I'm at Witts End (twisty passages everwhere!). I have > written an authentication module as a DSO for Apache 2.0.48 > I run FreeBSD here and it works just fine. I move the > source over to a SuSE 9.0 box where Apache 2.0.48 has > bee

Re: mod_proxy.so in Apache 2.0.49

2004-06-02 Thread g g
Hi Sander,   Thanks alot. The option suggested by you worked fine.   Regards, GaganSander Temme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Jun 1, 2004, at 5:29 PM, g g wrote:> Any pointers to why mod_proxy.so module is not getting generated in > apache2049 on AIX. I am building the source code with required > o

Re: mod_proxy.so in Apache 2.0.49

2004-06-02 Thread Jim Jagielski
g g wrote: > > I am trying to install Apache 2.0.49 on AIX 5.2 with proxy module enabled. I am > build the source code using following options: > > 1)configure --prefix= --enable-so --enable-proxy > > 2)make > > 3)make install > > After the installation is complete, if we try to look for

mod_ssl/input filter review needed

2004-06-02 Thread Joe Orton
I'm working on a fix for #12355, the (infamous?) "per-directory SSL renegotiation vs request with bodies" bug. The issue is explained at length in ssl_engine_kernel.c; simply put: if an SSLRequire is specified in a directory/location context, it's necessary to perform an SSL handshake *after* the

Re: Notify about using the e-mail account.

2004-06-02 Thread Alexander Lazic
On Mit 02.06.2004 12:35, Alexander Lazic wrote: Hi, i got this mail: Sorry to send it to list :-(. Please ignore it. al

Re: Notify about using the e-mail account.

2004-06-02 Thread Alexander Lazic
Hi, i got this mail: --- On Die 01.06.2004 23:01, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear user of Apache.org, Your e-mail account has been temporary disabled because of unauthorized access. Further details can be obtained from attached file. Best wishes,     The Apache.org team