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: 2004/07/28 23:17:16 $]
Release:
2.0.51 : in development
2.0.50 : released June 30, 2004 as GA.
2.0.49 : released March 19, 2004 as GA.
2.0.48 : released October 29, 2003 as GA.
APACHE 1.3 STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$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
Basically, the macro is wrong and needs to be removed. The contract
that _all_ APR API's live up to is that on a successful result, they
must return APR_SUCCESS. The reason we chose to use 0 as success is
simple:
1) Most platforms can check for equality with 0 faster than they can
check for any
Greg Stein wrote:
On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 08:08:05PM -0400, Ryan Bloom wrote:
Basically, the macro is wrong and needs to be removed. The contract
that _all_ APR API's live up to is that on a successful result, they
must return APR_SUCCESS. The reason we chose to use 0 as success is
simple:
Yup.
On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 08:08:05PM -0400, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> Basically, the macro is wrong and needs to be removed. The contract
> that _all_ APR API's live up to is that on a successful result, they
> must return APR_SUCCESS. The reason we chose to use 0 as success is
> simple:
Yup. The contra
Yaqian Shen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> Where can I find the test cases you developers
> are using in testing the whole system before you make an official
> release?
httpd-test?
http://httpd.apache.org/test/
--
Joe Schaefer
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
The initial thought was you might have LDAP success, OS status success,
and possibly multiple return codes that were considered successes.
Nothing was ever done with this.
What about the win32 definition of the macro:
#define APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS(s) ((s) == AP
The initial thought was you might have LDAP success, OS status success,
and possibly multiple return codes that were considered successes.
Nothing was ever done with this.
Bill
At 02:40 PM 7/28/2004, Garrett Rooney wrote:
>Geoffrey Young wrote:
>>hi all
>>I was just in garrett's APR talk here at
cross-posted to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Garrett Rooney wrote:
> Geoffrey Young wrote:
>
>> hi all
>>
>> I was just in garrett's APR talk here at oscon and he was mentioning the
>> APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS macro, which I found interesting since httpd
>> only uses
>> it in a few places, opting for a direct
Geoffrey Young wrote:
hi all
I was just in garrett's APR talk here at oscon and he was mentioning the
APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS macro, which I found interesting since httpd only uses
it in a few places, opting for a direct comparison to APR_SUCCESS instead.
should we move to APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS in al
Dear all, I'm doing a study in open source software development. I've a question about Aapche testing. Where can I find the test cases you developers are using in testing the whole system before you make an official release? What kind of testing techniques you are using? Who is responsible for this
hi all
I was just in garrett's APR talk here at oscon and he was mentioning the
APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS macro, which I found interesting since httpd only uses
it in a few places, opting for a direct comparison to APR_SUCCESS instead.
should we move to APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS in all places? can someo
i don't think so.
Norton AntiVirus excluído1.txt
Description: plain/text
[Let's try this again, with the right subject line. Please disregard
the previous post. Sigh. Sometimes I'm amazed I remember how to get
up in the morning.]
Joshua Slive <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jul 2004, Dan Wilga wrote:
> [Fri Jul 02 11:14:30 2004] [info] Initial (No.1) HTTPS req
Joshua Slive <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jul 2004, Dan Wilga wrote:
> [Fri Jul 02 11:14:30 2004] [info] Initial (No.1) HTTPS request received for
> child 0 (server [server name]:443)
> [Fri Jul 02 11:14:30 2004] [info] (104)Connection reset by peer:
> core_output_filter: writing data
16 matches
Mail list logo
