Re: 3.0 - Proposed Goals

2007-02-27 Thread Jim Jagielski
... -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball.

Re: Board Report is due on Monday....

2007-02-27 Thread Jim Jagielski
- mod_wombat IP clearance done. (import happening RSN) Anything else anyone can come up with? Not really. -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ If you can dodge

Re: Using mod_proxy from another module

2007-02-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
Yep. No problem. On Feb 21, 2007, at 4:50 AM, Marc Stern wrote: Is it also possible to make a post with this ? This is what I need. Jim Jagielski wrote: How could we use mod_proxy for outgoing connections from another module ? Is there any simple way ? Is there any standard (I mean

sed filter module

2007-03-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
There have been times when having a simple sed filter in Apache would be useful... I used to use just ext_filter to do this, but this got more and more painful the more I used it. So awhile ago I made mod_sed_filter which I find pretty useful. I've just built and tested in with 2.2 and trunk...

Re: sed filter module

2007-03-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Mar 13, 2007, at 1:10 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Is this sed or pcre syntax? I'm a bit confused :) It's a mutant ;) But, of course, we maintain that confusion internally with regex's being pcre... Although it's sed-ish, is it misleading to confuse the user with the phrase sed

Re: sed filter module

2007-03-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Mar 13, 2007, at 2:08 PM, Nick Kew wrote: AFAICS, this not merely looks like mod_line_edit: the filter *is* mod_line_edit, right down to the bucket manipulation logic used as an example in The Book! It's just missing a couple of minor features, and has a slightly different configuration

Re: sed filter module

2007-03-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Mar 13, 2007, at 3:34 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Jim Jagielski wrote: On Mar 13, 2007, at 1:10 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Is this sed or pcre syntax? I'm a bit confused :) It's a mutant ;) But, of course, we maintain that confusion internally with regex's being pcre

Re: sed filter module

2007-03-14 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Mar 14, 2007, at 5:07 AM, Frank wrote: RewriteBodyLine 'http://(.*?)/(.*)/(.*)' 'http://${LOWERCASE:$1}/$ {MD5:$2}/$3' Yeah, that would be useful... Of course, the main issue is that whereas mod_rewrite can afford to be dog slow, because, after all, the URLs aren't *that* big,

Re: sed filter module

2007-03-14 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Mar 14, 2007, at 11:01 AM, Nick Kew wrote: Oh, I guess you mean the copying to get a null-terminated string when applying a regexp? And I see it's repeated for every regexp (ouch)! mod_line_edit uses a local pool which is cleared at the end of each brigade, and avoids multiple copies of

Re: sed filter module

2007-03-14 Thread Jim Jagielski
As a rough proof of concept, I refactored the design, allowing for the pattern matching and substitution to be done as soon as we have a line. Also is some rough ability to pass the data to the next filter after we get more than ~AP_MIN_BYTES_TO_WRITE bytes. Doesn't alleviate all the problems,

sed and offline

2007-03-15 Thread Jim Jagielski
I'll be offline most of tomorrow and pretty much the whole weekend. Unless I hear vetos, I'll commit the latest mod_sed_filter.c to trunk. If we change the name, which is fine with me, well... that's the joy of svn move :)

Re: mod_proxy patches

2007-03-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Mar 16, 2007, at 8:52 AM, Mathias Herberts wrote: I agree that reusing the backend connections can be a good thing, but there are times when this is just not a very good idea. I agree that there are times when having a single-shot connection is better than having a pool. It's certainly

Re: [PATCH] ProxyAddXHeaders for mod_proxy

2007-04-04 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Feb 28, 2007, at 11:59 AM, Dziugas Baltrunas wrote: Hi, list, attaching same patch with small correction to the one submitted previously (was unnecessary double check for PROXYREQ_REVERSE). Patch is for httpd-2.2.x branch. Patches should be against trunk. Once approved and proven in

Re: Bug 41897 / Session-Stickiness with mod_proxy_balancer

2007-04-04 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 4, 2007, at 8:46 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote: But this means that we break the ABI here. If struct proxy_balancer is part of a public API (I am not sure about this) this would require a major bump and would prevent backporting. Since the whole idea of loadable lb method

Re: Bug 41897 / Session-Stickiness with mod_proxy_balancer

2007-04-04 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 4, 2007, at 9:38 AM, Mladen Turk wrote: Plüm wrote: Yes, although MAX_ENTRIES would be 3 for now (cookie, path and env) But this means that we break the ABI here. If struct proxy_balancer is part of a public API (I am not sure about this) this would require a major bump and

Re: Bug 41897 / Session-Stickiness with mod_proxy_balancer

2007-04-04 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 4, 2007, at 10:27 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote: Hmmm... I like this idea. Not sure about the use of '/' as the delim (simply because of its other meanings) but that's secondary. Of course, we can't use strtok, since sticky is a const char and we can't be shoving NULLs in there :)

Re: Bug 41897 / Session-Stickiness with mod_proxy_balancer

2007-04-04 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 4, 2007, at 11:34 AM, Georg von Zezschwitz wrote: Jim Jagielski schrieb: Rüdiger's point is that we would be doing the scanning for each and every request, which is wasteful since they aren't changing. Even in the above the strlen() is counting chars that don't change between requests

Re: mod_ftp enhancements - group directories

2007-04-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 5, 2007, at 7:16 PM, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote: I would like to propose two enhancements to mod_ftp. The same way we have FTPJailUser and CreateHomeDir directives, we would need FTPJailGroup and CreateGroupDirs directives. This would allow us manage FTP files based on groups,

Re: mod_proxy buffering small chunks

2007-04-12 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 11, 2007, at 3:34 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: On 04/11/2007 06:42 PM, Filipe wrote: I'm trying to use apache to proxy a push application, using chunked transfer encoding. The problem is that the mod_proxy buffers the server response internally and only sends the data to the client

Re: ProxyErrorOverride and redirects (PR 39245)

2007-04-12 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 12, 2007, at 10:16 AM, Joe Orton wrote: On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 10:05:06AM -0400, Jeff Trawick wrote: I wonder why Error in ProxyErrorOverride doesn't match the meaning of ap_is_HTTP_ERROR(), as in the attached patch (with doc). Great, +1 1xx isn't something the user should

Re: mod_proxy buffering small chunks

2007-04-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 13, 2007, at 5:20 AM, Mladen Turk wrote: Anyhow, I'll commit a patch to the trunk for http, cause its configurable by flushwait and skipped otherwise. Looking forward to seeing it... recall that if we flush at every chunk with HTTP, we will be dead slow and filters will not be happy

Re: mod_proxy buffering small chunks

2007-04-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 13, 2007, at 5:20 AM, Mladen Turk wrote: Plüm wrote: +1 I will try to check it once you have proposed it and give it a quick vote. I have another one that fixes this issues for non-chunked content. I haven't tried yet, but IMHO it should already work for non-chunked content. Is this

Re: mod_proxy buffering small chunks

2007-04-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 13, 2007, at 11:34 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: On Apr 13, 2007, at 5:20 AM, Mladen Turk wrote: Plüm wrote: +1 I will try to check it once you have proposed it and give it a quick vote. I have another one that fixes this issues for non-chunked content. I haven't tried yet, but IMHO

Re: mod_proxy buffering small chunks

2007-04-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 13, 2007, at 12:03 PM, Mladen Turk wrote: Jim Jagielski wrote: Not according to my tests. The simple server push still buffers the data. Hmmm a followup commit has: URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=504559 so that may be exactly the case... Huh, looks like it works

Re: RFE -- external overload procedure

2007-04-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
It would be best, I think, if the patches actually used normal httpd coding standards... The whole MAX_OVLP_LINE stuff is very out of place. On Apr 25, 2007, at 10:02 AM, Juerg Umhang wrote: its now in bugzilla. patches submitted http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42216 --

Re: mod_ftp, status and progress?

2007-04-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 18, 2007, at 1:22 PM, Guenter Knauf wrote: Hi, the current code fails to build for Win32 target. This is because ftp_glob.c seems not APR-ised yet; I'm actually looking at removing the whole glob stuff and emulating it as regexes...

Re: Store data accessible by all process and threads.

2007-04-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 19, 2007, at 6:25 PM, moh bad wrote: Hi, within a module, what is the best way to store data, who need to be accessible to all threads and process ? 1/ using shared memory, with apr_shm_* #1

Re: Store data accessible by all process and threads.

2007-04-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 21, 2007, at 12:28 AM, Saju Pillai wrote: Read-Write data ? shm is ok. Any standard IPC should work. apr provides this.

Re: bug with Apache 1.3 NetWare build system

2007-04-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 23, 2007, at 1:20 PM, Brad Nicholes wrote: +1, go ahead and commit it. Brad +1

Re: Patch for implementing ap_document_root as a hook

2007-04-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 23, 2007, at 10:46 AM, Brian J. France wrote: On Apr 23, 2007, at 10:32 AM, Jakob Goldbach wrote: -1 on the face of things. The map_to_storage hook was added to accomplish what you desire. I thought map_to_storage was made to do per-dir configuration. Not path-translation. The

Re: mod_ftp, status and progress?

2007-04-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 26, 2007, at 8:55 AM, Niklas Edmundsson wrote: On Thu, 26 Apr 2007, Jim Jagielski wrote: On Apr 18, 2007, at 1:22 PM, Guenter Knauf wrote: Hi, the current code fails to build for Win32 target. This is because ftp_glob.c seems not APR-ised yet; I'm actually looking at removing

Re: mod_ftp, status and progress?

2007-04-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 26, 2007, at 9:22 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: On Apr 26, 2007, at 8:55 AM, Niklas Edmundsson wrote: On Thu, 26 Apr 2007, Jim Jagielski wrote: On Apr 18, 2007, at 1:22 PM, Guenter Knauf wrote: Hi, the current code fails to build for Win32 target. This is because ftp_glob.c seems

Re: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 39710] - mod_cgi truncates error replies

2007-04-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 26, 2007, at 11:58 AM, Nick Kew wrote: On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 07:21:27 -0700 (PDT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-26 07:21 --- (In reply to comment #7) Anything I can do to help get this bug fixed? Is testing the patch all that

Re: mod_ftp, status and progress?

2007-04-27 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 26, 2007, at 5:39 PM, Niklas Edmundsson wrote: On Thu, 26 Apr 2007, Jim Jagielski wrote: I'm actually looking at removing the whole glob stuff and emulating it as regexes... Wouldn't apr_match_glob() be a better starting point? I don't really see the point of going via regexes

Re: Releases around ApacheCon EU?

2007-04-27 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 26, 2007, at 5:52 PM, Sander Temme wrote: Community, As ApacheCon draws near, perhaps we should plan some httpd releases during the week? Between beer and bitterballen there must be time to bat some patches around(1). Going in with the intention of, say, a TR on Wednesday after

Re: SatisfyOne

2007-04-27 Thread Jim Jagielski
Are you sure that there are no other conflicting ACLs? On Apr 27, 2007, at 1:30 PM, Patrick Welche wrote: Basically, bug or configuration error? Using httpd trunk 529626, of Apr 19 2007, I tried a FAQ configuration with the new authentication framework: Directory

Re: mod_ftp, status and progress?

2007-04-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 27, 2007, at 5:18 PM, Niklas Edmundsson wrote: On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Jim Jagielski wrote: I'm actually looking at removing the whole glob stuff and emulating it as regexes... Wouldn't apr_match_glob() be a better starting point? I don't really see the point of going via regexes... I

Re: mod_ftp, status and progress?

2007-04-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 28, 2007, at 1:34 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: On Apr 27, 2007, at 5:18 PM, Niklas Edmundsson wrote: On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Jim Jagielski wrote: I'm actually looking at removing the whole glob stuff and emulating it as regexes... Wouldn't apr_match_glob() be a better starting point? I

Re: mod_ftp, status and progress?

2007-05-02 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 28, 2007, at 1:40 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: In fact, to be honest, it would be easier still to just update ftp_direntry_get() to use apr_fnmatch(), since we always want to support globing. ftp_direntry_get already does most of what makes apr_match_glob attractive in the 1st place

Re: mod_ftp, status and progress?

2007-05-03 Thread Jim Jagielski
On May 3, 2007, at 4:37 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Niklas Edmundsson wrote: On Wed, 2 May 2007, Jim Jagielski wrote: In fact, to be honest, it would be easier still to just update ftp_direntry_get() to use apr_fnmatch(), since we always want to support globing. ftp_direntry_get already

Re: mod proxy disabling workers after a single error

2007-05-04 Thread Jim Jagielski
On May 4, 2007, at 11:37 AM, Brian Hayward wrote: I have 2 questions: 1) What are the negative implications of disabling this? 2) Is there a cleaner way to accomplish this? So you just want to setup Apache so that even if it thinks there's an error, to just ignore it?

Re: mod proxy disabling workers after a single error

2007-05-04 Thread Jim Jagielski
allowing someone to set that as an option might be a potential enhancement... On May 4, 2007, at 2:16 PM, Brian Hayward wrote: Yea, as it currently stands, one timeout is causing us to lose up to 10 more transactions during the next second (with retry=1) Thanks, Brian Hayward On 5/4/07, Jim

CHANGES file for 1.3 and 2.x

2007-05-07 Thread Jim Jagielski
Seems to me that the more we work on the various 2.x trees (2.0.x, 2.2.x and trunk), the harder it becomes to get the various correct CHANGES entries in sync... For example, the CHANGES for 2.2 and trunk just refer to changes up to 2.0.56... What's the best way of syncing these? Should we stop

Re: svn commit: r536291 - in /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x: STATUS modules/proxy/proxy_util.c

2007-05-09 Thread Jim Jagielski
On May 9, 2007, at 8:18 AM, Roy T. Fielding wrote: On May 8, 2007, at 11:25 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +#define USE_ALTERNATE_IS_CONNECTED 1 + +#if !defined(APR_MSG_PEEK) defined(MSG_PEEK) +#define APR_MSG_PEEK MSG_PEEK +#endif + +#if USE_ALTERNATE_IS_CONNECTED defined(APR_MSG_PEEK)

Re: svn commit: r536291 - in /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x: STATUS modules/proxy/proxy_util.c

2007-05-09 Thread Jim Jagielski
On May 9, 2007, at 8:55 AM, Roy T. Fielding wrote: On May 9, 2007, at 5:32 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: On May 9, 2007, at 8:18 AM, Roy T. Fielding wrote: On May 8, 2007, at 11:25 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +#define USE_ALTERNATE_IS_CONNECTED 1 + +#if !defined(APR_MSG_PEEK) defined(MSG_PEEK

Re: ProxyPass globbing

2007-05-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
On May 11, 2007, at 5:23 PM, Mladen Turk wrote: Jim Jagielski wrote: 1. ProxyPass /foo/* balancer://bar should silently rewrite itself to ProxyPass /foo/ balancer://bar In other words, we already assume a prefix glob. But should we? In other words

Re: ProxyPass globbing

2007-05-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
On May 11, 2007, at 5:39 PM, Nick Kew wrote: On Fri, 11 May 2007 15:19:58 -0400 Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been looking at extending ProxyPass to accept and use globbing patterns (basically, to make it easier for those migrating from mod_jk and JkMount to Apache 2.2

Re: ProxyPass globbing

2007-05-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
On May 11, 2007, at 5:56 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: On 05/11/2007 11:23 PM, Mladen Turk wrote: And of course once you introduce wild char maps there must be some sort of exclusion rules. ProxyPass /*/foo/* balancer://bar then for example by extending ProxyBlock ProxyBlock /*/foo/*.gif

Re: ProxyPass globbing

2007-05-12 Thread Jim Jagielski
On May 12, 2007, at 3:46 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: Do we really need this? As we know from Rich's lightning talk at the ApacheCon every directive can be replaced by a rewrite rule :-). Except that mod_rewrite is not balancer aware... so using rewrite rules uses the default reverse

Re: ProxyPass globbing

2007-05-12 Thread Jim Jagielski
On May 12, 2007, at 10:09 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: Still, just because mod_rewrite allows it doesn't mean we shouldn't allow ProxyPass to do what's right. ;) in any case, added to trunk... next step is to also make the Directory container method work...

Re: svn commit: r537429 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy: mod_proxy.c mod_proxy.h

2007-05-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
On May 12, 2007, at 12:45 PM, Joshua Slive wrote: On 05/12/2007 04:12 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Author: jim Date: Sat May 12 07:12:24 2007 New Revision: 537429 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=537429 Log: Add regex pattern matching to ProxyPass, allowing, for example:

Re: ProxyPass globbing

2007-05-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
On May 12, 2007, at 11:19 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: On 05/12/2007 04:15 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: On May 12, 2007, at 10:09 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: Still, just because mod_rewrite allows it doesn't mean we shouldn't allow ProxyPass to do what's right. ;) in any case, added to trunk

Re: ProxyPass globbing

2007-05-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
On May 13, 2007, at 1:01 AM, Paul Querna wrote: Well... I think we should consider a more generic way to do this. What I would like to see is something like AddHandler gif proxy=balancer://bar If mod_proxy knew about a handler syntax like this, you could do lots of creative things,

Re: svn commit: r537429 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy: mod_proxy.c mod_proxy.h

2007-05-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
On May 12, 2007, at 11:10 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: Sorry for being picky here: One space too much. ... Again I am picky here: Too many spaces. No worries. Good catches.

Re: svn commit: r537429 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy: mod_proxy.c mod_proxy.h

2007-05-14 Thread Jim Jagielski
On May 13, 2007, at 3:07 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: On 05/12/2007 05:10 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: On 05/12/2007 04:12 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Author: jim Date: Sat May 12 07:12:24 2007 New Revision: 537429 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=537429 Log: Add regex pattern

Re: ftp glob/limits?

2007-05-15 Thread Jim Jagielski
On May 14, 2007, at 4:18 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: What would folks think about changing if (ap_strchr_c(arg, '*') != NULL) { /* Prevent DOS attacks, only allow one segment to have a wildcard */ int found = 0; /* The number of segments with a wildcard */

Re: ProxyTimeout does not work as documented

2007-05-21 Thread Jim Jagielski
On May 19, 2007, at 3:22 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: On 05/19/2007 04:07 PM, Eric Covener wrote: On 5/18/07, Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Currently ProxyTimeout does not work as documented as the default value is not 300 secs, but the Timeout setting of the server. The question

Re: Any progress on PR41230 (HEAD issues on cached items)?

2007-05-21 Thread Jim Jagielski
On May 18, 2007, at 5:26 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: On 5/18/07, Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, because rv == !OK, wouldn't the CACHE_REMOVE_URL filter hit? That should do the dirty deed, no? -- justin No, as the CACHE_REMOVE_URL filter will only work if there is a

Re: [Issue] External links @ the wiki, aka pagechange wars

2007-05-24 Thread Jim Jagielski
On May 24, 2007, at 8:50 AM, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote: On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 08:05:30AM -0400, Joshua Slive wrote: External links are encouraged where they add substantial value, but you may not link to your own pages or otherwise seek private benefits from external links. I like the

Re: [vote] Piped loggers and APR_SHELLCMD_ENV

2007-05-24 Thread Jim Jagielski
On May 24, 2007, at 4:04 AM, Sander Temme wrote: On May 23, 2007, at 4:39 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: [ ] Revert to |foo to invoke foo, and add |$foo syntax to launch foo via sh I like this one the best, since it consumes fewest resources in the default case. [ ] Retain

Re: [Fwd: Apache httpd vulenrabilities]

2007-05-30 Thread Jim Jagielski
On May 29, 2007, at 5:28 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Essentially, PID tables need to move from the score to a local process list only in the parent, and unshared. That would solve the 80/20 of this entire class of issues. Yes... Of course, it doesn't even need to be that extensive. If

Re: httpd 1.3 / 2.0 / 2.2 tags this weekend?

2007-05-30 Thread Jim Jagielski
On May 30, 2007, at 1:56 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: I'd like to see new tarballs rolled soonish, given the single significant bug that was disclosed earlier today. Obviously most mass-vhosters are capable of compiling their own binary, so providing the seperate-pid-table patch

Re: [Fwd: Apache httpd vulenrabilities]

2007-05-30 Thread Jim Jagielski
On May 30, 2007, at 2:57 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: On 05/30/2007 08:10 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: On May 29, 2007, at 5:28 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Essentially, PID tables need to move from the score to a local process list only in the parent, and unshared. That would solve

Re: httpd 1.3 / 2.0 / 2.2 tags this weekend?

2007-05-30 Thread Jim Jagielski
On May 30, 2007, at 2:41 PM, Sander Temme wrote: On May 29, 2007, at 10:56 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: I volunteer to roll 1.3 when it's ready, since Sander offered to roll 2.2 (and perhaps 2.0?) I'll be happy to RM both. I'd like to, but my time will be sporadic enough the next

Re: [Fwd: Apache httpd vulenrabilities]

2007-05-30 Thread Jim Jagielski
Ruediger Pluem wrote: On 05/30/2007 09:45 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: On May 30, 2007, at 2:57 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: On 05/30/2007 08:10 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: On May 29, 2007, at 5:28 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Essentially, PID tables need to move from

Re: [Fwd: Apache httpd vulenrabilities]

2007-06-01 Thread Jim Jagielski
For 1.3, I'm looking at something like this... Similar approach for 2.x... Comments and feedback appreciated before I work on porting to the 2.x trees: Index: main/http_main.c === --- main/http_main.c(revision 543486) +++

Re: [Fwd: Apache httpd vulenrabilities]

2007-06-01 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Jun 1, 2007, at 10:19 AM, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote: On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 10:05:26AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote: - if (ap_scoreboard_image-servers[n].status != SERVER_DEAD - kill((pid = ap_scoreboard_image-parent[n].pid), 0) == -1) { - ap_update_child_status

Re: [Fwd: Apache httpd vulenrabilities]

2007-06-01 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Jun 1, 2007, at 10:45 AM, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote: On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 10:50:09AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote: Should we get rid of it from the table here? Can we get away without removing stale pids in general? What if they are recycled by the OS for something else? No, that's

Re: [Fwd: Apache httpd vulenrabilities]

2007-06-01 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Jun 1, 2007, at 11:39 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: I will likely just commit the updated patch, and we can fine-tune via commits rather than having rounds of patches posted :) I just started on the trunk patches, not sure when they will be done... anyway, I was think that in addition

Re: [Fwd: Apache httpd vulenrabilities]

2007-06-01 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Jun 1, 2007, at 3:35 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: FWIW, I've created a branch of the work in progress, so people can follow along and provide comments and patches :) http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/httpd-pid- table this is based off of trunk, so once we have

Re: svn commit: r543511 - /httpd/httpd/branches/1.3.x/src/main/http_main.c

2007-06-01 Thread Jim Jagielski
be somewhat faster and simpler to do. Of course we waste more memory. We can afford the time taken I think, to save space and to be more efficient... I really dislike all that wasted space :) -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL

Re: svn commit: r543667 - /httpd/httpd/branches/httpd-pid-table/server/mpm/mpmt_os2/mpmt_os2.c

2007-06-02 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Jun 2, 2007, at 3:57 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: On 06/02/2007 01:44 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Author: jim Date: Fri Jun 1 16:44:36 2007 New Revision: 543667 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=543667 Log: Minor nit... be consistent and unset even now :) Modified:

Re: svn commit: r543511 - /httpd/httpd/branches/1.3.x/src/main/http_main.c

2007-06-04 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Jun 4, 2007, at 2:35 AM, David McCreedy wrote: On 06/01/2007 05:42 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Author: jim Date: Fri Jun 1 08:42:57 2007 New Revision: 543511 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=543511 Log: Add in parent process PID table, to provide for a check against

Re: svn commit: r543511 - /httpd/httpd/branches/1.3.x/src/main/http_main.c

2007-06-04 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Jun 4, 2007, at 2:35 AM, David McCreedy wrote: On 06/01/2007 05:42 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Author: jim Date: Fri Jun 1 08:42:57 2007 New Revision: 543511 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=543511 Log: Add in parent process PID table, to provide for a check against

Re: svn commit: r543511 - /httpd/httpd/branches/1.3.x/src/main/http_main.c

2007-06-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Jun 4, 2007, at 10:29 PM, David McCreedy wrote: June 04, 2007 5:51 PM David McCreedy wrote: On 06/01/2007 05:42 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think I squashed those. Could you check out trunk and try another test? Thanks! It fixes the Bad pid error but I'm not sure all is well... On

pid_table (Was: Re: svn commit: r543511 - /httpd/httpd/branches/1.3.x/src/main/http_main.c)

2007-06-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
It looks the the 1.3 pid_table impl is pretty much on target. I've been testing the trunk (2.3.x) version with no issues that I've been able to see, but was wondering how many others are testing... In the meantime, should I create a 2.2 branch for the 2.2-version of the pid_table code and

Re: [PATCH] 'clogging' input filters and the event MPM

2007-06-12 Thread Jim Jagielski
+1 (concept) On Jun 10, 2007, at 9:13 PM, Paul Querna wrote: Attached is a patch that should let people run mod_ssl under the Event MPM. Previously, the event mpm would put a socket into its event thread to wait for input, but due to issues with how mod_ssl might be buffering data (or the

Re: pid_table (Was: Re: svn commit: r543511 - /httpd/httpd/branches/1.3.x/src/main/http_main.c)

2007-06-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Jun 6, 2007, at 9:13 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: In the meantime, should I create a 2.2 branch for the 2.2-version of the pid_table code and backport the changes to that? Unless I hear otherwise, I'll likely do that since the backport from 2.2 to 2.0 shouldn't be that involved. Done

Re: pid_table (Was: Re: svn commit: r543511 - /httpd/httpd/branches/1.3.x/src/main/http_main.c)

2007-06-16 Thread Jim Jagielski
Status Update: The pid-table code is: o Applied to 1.3 branch o In httpd-2.0-pid-table branch (branches/2.0.x fork) o In httpd-2.2-pid-table branch (branches/2.2.x fork) o In httpd-pid-table branch (trunk fork) Passes httpd-tests, as well as 'ab' with *very* small

Re: PID table changes (was Re: svn commit: r547987 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk)

2007-06-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Jun 21, 2007, at 1:18 PM, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote: On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 05:51:34PM +0100, Joe Orton wrote: On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 09:29:25PM -, Jim Jagielski wrote: Secondly: I think this approach is unnecessarily complex. I think it's sufficient to simply check whether

Re: PID table changes (was Re: svn commit: r547987 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk)

2007-06-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Jun 21, 2007, at 12:51 PM, Joe Orton wrote: Firstly my sincere apologies to Jim for bringing this up after such considerable work was put in already - I've had a busy month with a week out for a holiday :( Secondly: I think this approach is unnecessarily complex. I think it's

Re: PID table changes (was Re: svn commit: r547987 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk)

2007-06-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Jun 21, 2007, at 6:20 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Joe Orton wrote: On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 06:18:59PM +0100, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote: On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 05:51:34PM +0100, Joe Orton wrote: On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 09:29:25PM -, Jim Jagielski wrote: Secondly: I think

Re: svn commit: r551171 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS

2007-06-27 Thread Jim Jagielski
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 +

Re: svn commit: r551171 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS

2007-06-27 Thread Jim Jagielski
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

Re: PID table changes (was Re: svn commit: r547987 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk)

2007-06-27 Thread Jim Jagielski
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

Re: [PATCH] pid safety checks for 2.2.x

2007-06-27 Thread Jim Jagielski
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

Re: [PATCH] pid safety checks for 2.2.x

2007-06-27 Thread Jim Jagielski
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

Re: [PATCH] pid safety checks for 2.2.x

2007-06-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Jun 28, 2007, at 7:56 AM, Joe Orton wrote: So, final comments on this? If there's consensus that this is the approach to take I'll revert the pidtable stuff out of trunk, commit this there, and propose the backport. Don't forget the 1.3 branch...

Re: [PATCH] pid safety checks for 2.2.x

2007-07-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Jul 4, 2007, at 12:52 PM, Joe Orton wrote: On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 12:50:37PM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote: On Jun 28, 2007, at 7:56 AM, Joe Orton wrote: So, final comments on this? If there's consensus that this is the approach to take I'll revert the pidtable stuff out of trunk, commit

Re: Async write completion for 2.2.x?

2007-07-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Jul 5, 2007, at 9:20 PM, Paul Querna wrote: Jim Jagielski wrote: Any interest in seeing if the Async write completion code in trunk would be suitable for backporting to 2.2? The biggest problem is that async write completion in trunk got tied up in doing async reads, and some of those

Re: svn commit: r556931 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy/mod_proxy_balancer.c

2007-07-17 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Jul 17, 2007, at 10:31 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +if (*(workers-s-route) strcmp(workers-s-route, route) == 0) { Is that right? I'm guessing the 1st check was to make sure that workers-s-route wasn't NULL (and therefore the strcmp didn't dump), but instead you're checking

Re: svn commit: r556931 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy/mod_proxy_balancer.c

2007-07-17 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Jul 17, 2007, at 12:48 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote: Jim Jagielski wrote: On Jul 17, 2007, at 10:31 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +if (*(workers-s-route) strcmp(workers-s- route, route) == 0) { Is that right? I'm guessing the 1st check was to make sure that workers-s-route

Re: 2.2.5?

2007-07-20 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Jul 19, 2007, at 10:49 AM, Sander Temme wrote: On Jul 19, 2007, at 3:22 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: Now that the security related patches have been backported to 2.2.x is there anything that prevents us from releasing 2.2.5? Sander Temme volunteered to be the RM back in May. Is this

Re: svn commit: r559837 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/filters/mod_filter.c

2007-07-30 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Jul 26, 2007, at 3:46 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: This is correct (because provider-match is a union and provider- match.string and provider-match.regex are the same thing), but confusing. I would prefer checking provider-match.regex instead. Seems to me that avoiding unions

Re: TR Procedure for 1.3?

2007-07-31 Thread Jim Jagielski
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/how-to-release.html is kind of dated and yes is in need of an update, but I've never bothered doing so (except for the last 1.3 release, I've been RM for 1.3 for the last several years) The svn copy location however is

1.3 bugs

2007-08-02 Thread Jim Jagielski
I went through and cleared out maybe 200 or so bugzilla bugs for 1.3... Will start on the 2.x ones tomorrow and try to clear out most of the crud there... We have some real old ones :)

Re: 1.3 bugs

2007-08-02 Thread Jim Jagielski
Nick Kew wrote: On Thu, 2 Aug 2007 16:30:25 -0400 Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I went through and cleared out maybe 200 or so bugzilla bugs for 1.3... Will start on the 2.x ones tomorrow and try to clear out most of the crud there... We have some real old ones :) Nice

Re: 1.3 bugs

2007-08-02 Thread Jim Jagielski
It's easy to be brave when being heartless :) Lots of WONTFIX :) Tony Stevenson wrote: Impressive feat, takes a brave man to take on that many bugs! Jim Jagielski wrote: I went through and cleared out maybe 200 or so bugzilla bugs for 1.3... Will start on the 2.x ones tomorrow and try

PR 9727

2007-08-03 Thread Jim Jagielski
This PR (correctly) states that we aren't tagging double quote as a tspecial/separator. Adding it in causes no regressions, but I'm surprised that we haven't had more issues about its absence, which makes me nervous about changing it now... Comments?

TR schedule

2007-08-03 Thread Jim Jagielski
Lets shoot for a TR of 1.3, 2.0 and 2.2 on Aug 10th... That means a possible release on the 13th. That way, admins aren't compelled to upgrade before/during the weekend (other- wise, TR on the 8th and release on the 10th would make sense) I volunteer to RM 1.3 and even 2.2. afaict, 1.3 and 2.0

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >