warning: newbie alert!
I've got a simple module as detailed below. I based it off
of the example module, stripping it down to the smallest
example I could.
It seems to be working, but it is getting called on all
web pages. Can someone loan me a clue as to:
1. why it is being called on all
On 8/12/07, Mark Harrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've got a simple module as detailed below. I based it off
of the example module, stripping it down to the smallest
example I could.
It seems to be working, but it is getting called on all
web pages. Can someone loan me a clue as to:
1.
On 08/11/2007 01:49 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Available for your testing pleasure, 3, count 'em, 3
Apache HTTP Server release candidate tarballs, located,
as expected at:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
This vote will run through August 14, 2007...
+/-1 (x == +1)
[ ]
On 08/11/2007 01:49 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Available for your testing pleasure, 3, count 'em, 3
Apache HTTP Server release candidate tarballs, located,
as expected at:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
This vote will run through August 14, 2007...
+/-1 (x == +1)
[ ]
On Aug 12, 2007, at 9:00 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
-1 from me on 2.0.60 as the test framework revealed regressions
compared to 2.0.59:
What platform? Trying to recreate this...
These regression are caused by an apr problem. 2.0.59 is shipped
with apr 0.9.12 whereas
2.0.60 is
On 08/12/2007 05:45 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Aug 12, 2007, at 9:00 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
-1 from me on 2.0.60 as the test framework revealed regressions
compared to 2.0.59:
What platform? Trying to recreate this...
Sorry for omitting:
SuSE Linux 32 Bit:
gcc (GCC) 4.1.2
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 08/12/2007 05:45 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Also, would this require a new tag for 2.0.60? It's not
an Apache problem, rather with how the 2.0.60 tarball was
done, but whenever problems have existed in the tarballs
before, we have retagged and rerolled, which I
On 11 Aug 2007, at 00:49, Jim Jagielski wrote:
[ ]httpd-2.0.60
Not tested (moot in view of Ruediger's -1)
[ ]httpd-2.2.5
+1 Linux and MacOS. Fails two Perl tests on Mac (security/CVE-2004-0959
and apache/pr18757), but that appears to be down to my perl
installation.
--
Just a FYI: I'm planning on doing a TR of 2.0.61 tomorrow (Aug 13);
It's a retag of 2.0.60 (plus the version bump, 'natch), and a reroll
with the singular exception of bundling APR 0.9.12, instead of 0.9.14.
--
===
Jim
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Just a FYI: I'm planning on doing a TR of 2.0.61 tomorrow (Aug 13);
It's a retag of 2.0.60 (plus the version bump, 'natch), and a reroll
with the singular exception of bundling APR 0.9.12, instead of 0.9.14.
Just a quick note; I'll definitely find that objectionable.
10 matches
Mail list logo