Passes lots of tests, but still lots of work to do: written up at
(extreme) length here: http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/
2007/06/25/mod_atom
I don't know if httpd needs this mod_atom, but I suspect that it'll
need some mod_atom or another before too long. It would be nice to
be
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 06/26/2007 06:46 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
Ok, furthermore I think we need to adjust the proxy_status_hook to
actually display the string the user configured and not only the path
for the cookie. The same is true for the balancer
Tim Bray wrote:
Passes lots of tests, but still lots of work to do: written up at
(extreme) length here:
http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2007/06/25/mod_atom
I don't know if httpd needs this mod_atom, but I suspect that it'll need
some mod_atom or another before too long. It would be
On 06/27/2007 10:42 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: jfclere
Date: Wed Jun 27 01:42:02 2007
New Revision: 551099
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=551099
Log:
Remove the balancer modification logic of balancer-manager
because it can't work. And add the sticky_path to the
Paul, do you know offhand what the difference is between the
perl-framework, and perl.apache.org's Apache::Test framework? I'm
familiar with the latter, and have found it to be an amazing tool for
testing Apache modules written in all languages (and web applications of
any sort running on
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 06/27/2007 10:42 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: jfclere
Date: Wed Jun 27 01:42:02 2007
New Revision: 551099
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=551099
Log:
Remove the balancer modification logic of balancer-manager
because it can't work. And add the
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 00:44:42 -0700
Paul Querna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tim Bray wrote:
Passes lots of tests, but still lots of work to do: written up at
(extreme) length here:
http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2007/06/25/mod_atom
Nice writeup! The Loneliness of the Geek made me
On 6/27/07, Issac Goldstand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Paul, do you know offhand what the difference is between the
perl-framework, and perl.apache.org's Apache::Test framework? I'm
familiar with the latter, and have found it to be an amazing tool for
testing Apache modules written in all
Garrett Rooney wrote:
On 6/27/07, Issac Goldstand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Paul, do you know offhand what the difference is between the
perl-framework, and perl.apache.org's Apache::Test framework? I'm
familiar with the latter, and have found it to be an amazing tool for
testing Apache
On Jun 25, 2007, at 00:36, Graham Dumpleton wrote:
A few comments below, but a few questions first to satisfy my own
curiosity.
What specific applications are you running that require things to be
run as a distinct user? Are these applications implemented directly in
C as custom Apache
Folks want their static
files to be owned by themselves, and not readable to random other
users on the same system, but also serve-able by Apache. There are
various user and group permission that can make this sort-of-but-not-
quite happen, because whatever you do, someone can write a
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 14:17:36 -
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+* mod_proxy: Arrange the timeout handling.
+ Trunk version of patch:
+http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrevision=550514
+http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrevision=546128
+ +1: jfclere
Looks
Hi,
In mod_proxy_balancer.c there is the following code:
+++
/* Add the session route to request notes if present */
if (route) {
apr_table_setn(r-notes, session-sticky, (*balancer)-sticky);
apr_table_setn(r-notes, session-route, route);
/* Add session info to env. */
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 09:59:27 -0400
Rich Bowen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's a request that comes up every single day in the various support
forums: I am in a hosted environment, I have a virtual host, and a
bunch of random strangers have full read permissions to my sensitive
files, is
On Jun 27, 2007, at 11:08 AM, Nick Kew wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 14:17:36 -
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+* mod_proxy: Arrange the timeout handling.
+ Trunk version of patch:
+http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrevision=550514
+
On 06/27/2007 05:09 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Hi,
In mod_proxy_balancer.c there is the following code:
+++
/* Add the session route to request notes if present */
if (route) {
apr_table_setn(r-notes, session-sticky, (*balancer)-sticky);
apr_table_setn(r-notes,
On Jun 27, 2007, at 12:44 AM, Paul Querna wrote:
In a way, you could view the Atom Publishing Protocol in the same
light
as DAV. In that case, it makes sense to have generic module which
handles the protocol bits of APP, and provides a set of
callbacks/providers for other modules to use.
On 06/27/2007 05:51 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Jun 27, 2007, at 11:08 AM, Nick Kew wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 14:17:36 -
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+* mod_proxy: Arrange the timeout handling.
+ Trunk version of patch:
+
On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 11:03:41PM +0200, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 06/26/2007 08:37 PM, Joe Orton wrote:
My summary: I've still not seen any argument why it presents a security
risk for a malicious child to be able to kill a piped logger or other
non-MPM-spawned process, so:
What about
On Jun 27, 2007, at 12:20 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 06/27/2007 05:51 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Jun 27, 2007, at 11:08 AM, Nick Kew wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 14:17:36 -
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+* mod_proxy: Arrange the timeout handling.
+ Trunk version of patch:
+
On Jun 27, 2007, at 12:40 PM, Joe Orton wrote:
Right: it adds overhead without benefit, and there is also a risk of
regressions. e.g. in the trunk code it looks like children from
ap_register_extra_mpm_process() don't go in the pid table, so the
reclaim_one_pid() path to kill them won't
Here's the updated (and simpler) version of my patch which uses
apr_proc_wait() to determine whether a pid is a valid child. Simplifies
the MPM logic a bit since the pid != 0 check is moved into
ap_mpm_safe_kill().
Tested for both prefork and worker (on Linux) to fix the vulnerability
using
On 6/27/07, Nick Kew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is a problem that could be solved by documentation.
Maybe not quite as simple, but when the alternative is accepting
new connections whilst running as root.
Here's a start:
http://wiki.apache.org/httpd/Recipes/Privilege_Separation
It could
On 06/27/2007 09:21 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: fuankg
Date: Wed Jun 27 12:21:05 2007
New Revision: 551281
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=551281
Log:
Add 2 backport proposals.
Modified:
httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS
Modified:
On 06/27/2007 07:52 PM, Joe Orton wrote:
Index: server/mpm_common.c
===
--- server/mpm_common.c (revision 549489)
+++ server/mpm_common.c (working copy)
@@ -305,6 +305,27 @@
cur_extra = next;
}
}
Hi, I am an Ubuntu Linux bug triager, and someone proposed a patch for
a2ensite in a bug for Ubuntu.
I intend to reject the bug because this is not a bug, but a new feature
patch.
I have no knowledge at all to evaluate this patch, and would like
someone to review it, and take responsability
for
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 15:45:42 -0400
Paul Dufresne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, I am an Ubuntu Linux bug triager, and someone proposed a patch for
a2ensite in a bug for Ubuntu.
a2* are not from apache, but rather debianisms. I suggest you ask
there.
You might also want to read why apache on
On 06/27/2007 09:45 PM, Paul Dufresne wrote:
Hi, I am an Ubuntu Linux bug triager, and someone proposed a patch for
a2ensite in a bug for Ubuntu.
I intend to reject the bug because this is not a bug, but a new feature
patch.
I have no knowledge at all to evaluate this patch, and would like
Hi Ruediger,
Not a real problem and maybe nitpicking from my side, but the policy is to
add new proposals to the end of the file as you have done with your second
proposal.
thanks, and sorry, but I wasnt aware.
Just saw the two other mod_dbd related ones which suggested me that they were
On 06/27/2007 10:24 PM, Guenter Knauf wrote:
Hi Ruediger,
Not a real problem and maybe nitpicking from my side, but the policy is to
add new proposals to the end of the file as you have done with your second
proposal.
thanks, and sorry, but I wasnt aware.
As said, no reason to worry.
On Jun 27, 2007, at 3:38 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
Hm. Wouldn't it make sense to log this in the case
waitret != APR_CHILD_DONE
as in the PID table patches?
This could give the admin a hint that something is rotten on his box.
+1 on the logging...
Looking forward to seeing the 1.3
On Jun 27, 2007, at 1:52 PM, Joe Orton wrote:
Here's the updated (and simpler) version of my patch which uses
apr_proc_wait() to determine whether a pid is a valid child.
Simplifies
the MPM logic a bit since the pid != 0 check is moved into
ap_mpm_safe_kill().
Tested for both prefork and
On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 10:02 -0700, Chris Darroch wrote:
I apologize for joining this thread a little late. I know it's
more complicated, but I'm inclined to suggest trying to bring the more
comprehensive trunk fixes into 2.2.x.
Just a ping on the status of this backport...
--
Bojan
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 21:00:12 +0100, Nick Kew [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 15:45:42 -0400
Paul Dufresne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, I am an Ubuntu Linux bug triager, and someone proposed a patch for
a2ensite in a bug for Ubuntu.
a2* are not from apache, but rather
Tim Bray wrote:
On Jun 27, 2007, at 12:44 AM, Paul Querna wrote:
As it is currently written, I don't think it makes too much sense to put
it into httpd -- but if we could work on abstracting down a core, and a
set of separate hooks for storage + maybe a way to easily build end user
display, I
On 27-Jun-07, at 1:01 PM, Joshua Slive wrote:
On 6/27/07, Nick Kew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is a problem that could be solved by documentation.
Maybe not quite as simple, but when the alternative is accepting
new connections whilst running as root.
Here's a start:
Hi all,
I would like to have the SSL port also be setable as with the standard port;
Win32 has already a hack in, but I would also like to add such for Linux and
NetWare
here's my patch:
http://people.apache.org/~fuankg/diffs/sslport.diff
I believe it should work on Linux too, but would like
Ian Holsman wrote:
Tim Bray wrote:
On Jun 27, 2007, at 12:44 AM, Paul Querna wrote:
As it is currently written, I don't think it makes too much sense to put
it into httpd -- but if we could work on abstracting down a core, and a
set of separate hooks for storage + maybe a way to easily build
On 6/27/07, Rici Lake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If the user servers are listening on high ports, then they can be
started as the user/group rather than as root, and the owner could
have quite a bit of flexibility in configuring their server. It's
quite possible that less reliance on .htaccess
On Jun 27, 2007, at 3:33 PM, Ian Holsman wrote:
The whole point of APP is so dumb clients like cellphones and blog-
authoring packages can push bits at a server and leave the server
in control of where things go. I'm trying to imagine what the
storage hooks might look like.
If I am
On 27-Jun-07, at 6:07 PM, Joshua Slive wrote:
Good point. I moved some of this discussion into its own section,
since it applies equally to the main example.
Yes, that's much better.
I also removed your comments about needing separate LockFile/etc
locations, since its not true in recent
APACHE 2.0 STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2007-06-19 16:15:07 -0400 (Tue, 19 Jun 2007) $]
The current version of this file can be found at:
* http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/2.0.x/STATUS
Documentation status is
APACHE 2.2 STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2007-06-27 21:49:25 -0400 (Wed, 27 Jun 2007) $]
The current version of this file can be found at:
* http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS
Documentation status is
APACHE 2.3 STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2006-08-22 16:41:03 -0400 (Tue, 22 Aug 2006) $]
The current version of this file can be found at:
* http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/STATUS
Documentation status is maintained
I have some questions about apache configuration:
1. Does apache can be configured so he can order the clients according
to their throughput?
2. How can apache know the throughput of each client that connect to
it?
Thank for your attention to my questions
Bojan Smojver wrote:
I apologize for joining this thread a little late. I know it's
more complicated, but I'm inclined to suggest trying to bring the more
comprehensive trunk fixes into 2.2.x.
Just a ping on the status of this backport...
The proposals are in the 2.2.x STATUS file,
46 matches
Mail list logo
