On 2013-05-21 23:52, Sean Beck wrote:
Sorin,
Is there a way to figure out the name of the config file in code so I can
log it? Or even just the path to where it is.
Also, I'm confused because you said there is no such thing as a
module-specific configuration file, but then you said
On 05/14/2013 08:58 PM, minf...@apache.org wrote:
Author: minfrin
Date: Tue May 21 16:10:02 2013
New Revision: 1484852
URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1484852
Log:
core: Remove apr_brigade_flatten(), buffering and duplicated code
from the HTTP_IN filter, parse chunks in a single pass with zero
parse_chunk_size() also compares int's and size_t's.
Index: modules/http/http_filters.c
===
--- modules/http/http_filters.c(revision 1485126)
+++ modules/http/http_filters.c(working copy)
@@ -89,9 +89,9 @@
* In general, any
On 22 May 2013, at 1:06 PM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
On 05/14/2013 08:58 PM, minf...@apache.org wrote:
Author: minfrin
Date: Tue May 21 16:10:02 2013
New Revision: 1484852
URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1484852
Log:
core: Remove apr_brigade_flatten(), buffering and
Sorry, linelimit is an int and compared to an int.
Only i should be a size_t...
Index: modules/http/http_filters.c
===
--- modules/http/http_filters.c(revision 1485126)
+++ modules/http/http_filters.c(working copy)
@@ -91,7
I am not saying that the filter should not tolerate LF only as sperator,
but that after the chunk (ie. in the BODY_CHUNK_END state) it should only
accept CRLF (or LF only) and nothing else.
Regards,
Yann.
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Graham Leggett minf...@sharp.fm wrote:
On 22 May 2013,
On 22 May 2013, at 1:48 PM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
I am not saying that the filter should not tolerate LF only as sperator, but
that after the chunk (ie. in the BODY_CHUNK_END state) it should only accept
CRLF (or LF only) and nothing else.
Sure, but the old filter behaved
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Graham Leggett minf...@sharp.fm wrote:
On 22 May 2013, at 1:48 PM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
I am not saying that the filter should not tolerate LF only as sperator,
but that after the chunk (ie. in the BODY_CHUNK_END state) it should only
On 22 May 2013, at 2:47 PM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
Well, one could inject arbitrary data in this room (with no LF), bypassing
LimitRequestBody (which does not count chunks separators), and eat resources.
This opens doors, as often when a protocol is not checked carefully…
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Graham Leggett minf...@sharp.fm wrote:
All line lengths including the one you're referring to are constrained by
LimitRequestFieldSize, so to say that the protocol is unconstrained is
false.
Indeed I am wrong about the absence of constraint, which is not
From: Yann Ylavic [mailto:ylavic@gmail.com]
Sent: Mittwoch, 22. Mai 2013 13:06
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r1484852 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk: CHANGES
modules/http/http_filters.c
On 05/14/2013 08:58 PM, minf...@apache.orgmailto:minf...@apache.org wrote:
Author: minfrin
I guess you missed a special case:
If the reverse proxy backend sends a response without a Content-Length header
and without a Transfer-Encoding,
which is IMHO valid for HTTP 1.0 responses if the connection is closed after
the response.
The following patch would fix this:
Index:
On 22 May 2013, at 3:57 PM, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group
ruediger.pl...@vodafone.com wrote:
I guess you missed a special case:
If the reverse proxy backend sends a response without a Content-Length header
and without a Transfer-Encoding,
which is IMHO valid for HTTP 1.0 responses if the
-Original Message-
From: Graham Leggett [mailto:minf...@sharp.fm]
Sent: Mittwoch, 22. Mai 2013 16:17
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r1484852 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk: CHANGES
modules/http/http_filters.c
On 22 May 2013, at 3:57 PM, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group
On 22 May 2013, at 4:19 PM, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group
ruediger.pl...@vodafone.com wrote:
Yeah. You are correct. Looks sufficient.
Fixed in r1485257.
Regards,
Graham
--
I would be nice, imo, to start thinking about a 2.4.5
release Real Soon Now. We have lots of stuff added and
fixed in 2.4.5-dev and even more fun stuff in STATUS.
I'll RM.
On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:20:03 -0400
Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
I would be nice, imo, to start thinking about a 2.4.5
release Real Soon Now. We have lots of stuff added and
fixed in 2.4.5-dev and even more fun stuff in STATUS.
I'll RM.
+1 and once this head-cold is clear, I'm now
Hi all,
Can anyone tell me in what case apr__SHA384_Data in sha2.c will be
invoked. I am trying to make some optimizations in it.
Thanks,
kalyan
18 matches
Mail list logo
