APACHE 2.1 STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2004/04/27 22:09:17 $]
Release [NOTE that only Alpha/Beta releases occur in 2.1 development]:
2.1.0 : in development
Please consult the following STATUS files for information
on related proj
APACHE 2.0 STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2004/06/03 01:50:15 $]
Release:
2.0.50 : in development
2.0.49 : released March 19, 2004 as GA.
2.0.48 : released October 29, 2003 as GA.
2.0.47 : released July 09, 2003 as GA.
APACHE 1.3 STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$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
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
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 outdated documents.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
>
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
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
* "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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
16 matches
Mail list logo
