Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.35

On 18 Sep 2018, at 02:56, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: >Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/ > > I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release this > candidate tarball as 2.4.35: > [ ] +1: It's not just good,

Re: svn commit: r1840563 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS

Hi everybody, Il giorno mar 11 set 2018 alle ore 09:28 ha scritto: > > Author: icing > Date: Tue Sep 11 13:28:19 2018 > New Revision: 1840563 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1840563=rev > Log: > a cautious vote > > Modified: > httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS > > Modified:

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.35 in the next few hours

On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 1:56 PM Ruediger Pluem wrote: > > > You'll likely see issues testing against OpenSSL 1.1.1 until the > TLSv1.3 > > merge is integrated for 2.4.x, yeah, I wouldn't worry about that. > > > > > > But I think this is worth highlighting in our Announcement, that we

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.35 in the next few hours

On 09/18/2018 06:19 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 2:43 AM Joe Orton > wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 06:16:34PM -0500, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: > >Sorry - I know it wasn't a very good report. I was just seeing if > > anyone

Re: TLSv1.3 supprt for 2.4.x?

> Am 18.09.2018 um 17:03 schrieb Joe Orton : > >> On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 04:54:58PM +0200, Yann Ylavic wrote: >>> On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 4:08 PM Joe Orton wrote: >>> >>> As of r1841219 I think the tlsv1.3-for-2.4.x is ready for merging... >> >> Thanks Joe for the hard work! > > Thanks to

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.35 in the next few hours

On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 2:43 AM Joe Orton wrote: > On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 06:16:34PM -0500, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: > >Sorry - I know it wasn't a very good report. I was just seeing if > > anyone has experienced a similar holdup. In fact, I let it run while > > tending to other things and

Re: TLSv1.3 supprt for 2.4.x?

On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 04:54:58PM +0200, Yann Ylavic wrote: > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 4:08 PM Joe Orton wrote: > > > > As of r1841219 I think the tlsv1.3-for-2.4.x is ready for merging... > > Thanks Joe for the hard work! Thanks to Stefan for getting us most of the way! > Does it work for

Re: TLSv1.3 supprt for 2.4.x?

On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 4:08 PM Joe Orton wrote: > > As of r1841219 I think the tlsv1.3-for-2.4.x is ready for merging... Thanks Joe for the hard work! > > A BIG caveat remains around Post-Handshake Auth. With the current Perl > stack (including whatever adjustments for OpenSSL 1.1.1 already >

Re: svn commit: r1841078 - in /apr/apr/trunk: CHANGES apr.dsp atomic/unix/builtins64.c atomic/unix/mutex64.c atomic/win32/apr_atomic64.c include/apr_atomic.h include/arch/unix/apr_arch_atomic.h test/t

Moved from httpd dev (which was moved to BCC) > On Sep 17, 2018, at 2:54 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 5:52 PM Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >> Would like to also propose for apr-1.7... > > How about 128bit? :p > > There are __int128 (gcc) and _m128 (MSVC) and most 64bit

Re: TLSv1.3 supprt for 2.4.x?

As of r1841219 I think the tlsv1.3-for-2.4.x is ready for merging... A BIG caveat remains around Post-Handshake Auth. With the current Perl stack (including whatever adjustments for OpenSSL 1.1.1 already required) the failures I get with the test suite and that branch are significant, because

Re: svn commit: r1841078 - in /apr/apr/trunk: CHANGES apr.dsp atomic/unix/builtins64.c atomic/unix/mutex64.c atomic/win32/apr_atomic64.c include/apr_atomic.h include/arch/unix/apr_arch_atomic.h test/t

On 17 Sep 2018, at 20:54, Yann Ylavic wrote: > How about 128bit? :p > > There are __int128 (gcc) and _m128 (MSVC) and most 64bit intel/amd > CPUs support cmpxchg16b. > Intrinsics work on gcc, and (eg.) _InterlockedCompareExchange128 on Windows. > > This can be very useful to avoid the ABA

RE: minor nit in mod_ssl

In the same vein, I’ve been running this patch on our builds to get around a warning for certificates not matching the hostname. Certificates are not expected to match the hostname with many load balancing/uptime detection schemes, and this one logs a LOT when it trips on every vhost. Perhaps

Re: svn commit: r1841225 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/dav/main/props.c

Pools are very tricky in mod_dav. Hence additional eyeballs are very much welcome here. As I only did testing with mod_dav_fs I would be keen to know if things still work with Subversion. So if someone from the Subversion guys is listening here: Having this tested with Subversion would be very

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.35 in the next few hours

On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 06:16:34PM -0500, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: >    Sorry - I know it wasn't a very good report. I was just seeing if > anyone has experienced a similar holdup. In fact, I let it run while > tending to other things and came back to see it had completed (but > failed), so perhaps