On 12/9/06, Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for giving the pointer to ap_meets_conditions. So content compressed
by mod_deflate would not stand conditional requests based on ETags any longer.
That would be bad. Would it help if we simply unset the ETag in mod_deflate?
mod_filter
On 12/15/06, Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I see your point 100% though... I really hoped that we would
have had a 2.2.4 out sooner, but the votes didn't come as
fast as expected :)
What votes? I haven't seen any votes for 2.2.4. -- justin
On 10/18/06, Trent Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 11 October 2006 05:31
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: svn commit: r462696 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk: CHANGES
modules/cache/mod_disk_cache.c
On 12/25/06, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just so folks are aware why...
+APU_DECLARE_DATA const apr_bucket_type_t bucket_type_diskcache = {
+DISKCACHE, 5, APR_BUCKET_DATA,
+diskcache_bucket_destroy,
+diskcache_bucket_read,
+diskcache_bucket_setaside,
On 12/26/06, Brandon Fosdick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does gdb work on httpd and FreeBSD yet? I remember seeing some action on that
front many moons ago, but I don't remember what came of it.
gdb 6.6 works okay from source on FreeBSD 6.1. But, gdb 6.1 (bundled
with FreeBSD 6.1) certainly
On 12/26/06, Brandon Fosdick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Did you build 6.6 by modifying the 6.5 skeleton (from the PR) or did you build
it straight from source?
FWIW, I built straight from source and it worked fine. -- justin
On 12/29/06, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Propchange: httpd/test/trunk/flood/flood.vcproj
--
svn:eol-style = CRLF
-1.
My understanding was that VC 2005 requires its project files to be
On 12/29/06, Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Partial results are valid but processing is incomplete seems to be the OS
error message
to me. To be honest I am not quite sure what it wants me to tell. On which OS
did this happen?
I believe that error string is the APR_INCOMPLETE
On 12/29/06, Chris Darroch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The main trick here is that instead of the hard-coded version
string 0 for authn/z providers, AUTHN/Z_PROVIDER_VERSION_ALL_REQ and
AUTHN/Z_PROVIDER_VERSION_INITIAL_REQ are defined.
Without looking at the code, I'd hope that means that they
On 12/30/06, Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Digging somewhat deeper it turns out that adding APR_FINFO_NAME to the list of
wanted
information causes this apr_stat to return always APR_INCOMPLETE on Unix
platforms in
the case that the call to the native stat / lstat does not fail. This
On 12/30/06, Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Done in r491297 and hopefully documented well enough.
Pushed out a new build and now http://archive.apache.org/ is fine.
Thanks! -- justin
On 1/2/07, Torben S. Sørensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm trying to build flood according to the instructions on the
http://httpd.apache.org/test/flood/building.html. The source is version
0.4 and I'm building it on a Ubuntu 6.10 system.
As you can se on in the bottom I get an error very early
On Tue, Jan 09, 2007 at 12:09:17AM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Before I go any further, httpd-2.2.4-win32-src.zip is updated here at 6am UT
and will take an hour to move across to the live site
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
while the .tar files remain unchanged. Feedback to
On 1/9/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, correcting the additional cruft under srclib/zlib and srclib/openssl,
which are not part of the distribution, is a no brainer.
AIUI, it changes our Makefile not theirs.
So I presume you object to the six line patch I attached?
On 1/9/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
More to the point, it was their makefile (patched as needed, but that's
not the point) ... but not the rest of their packages. We don't ship
zlib/openssl sources in the package. In my build structure, they are
just junctions. I was
On Tue, Jan 09, 2007 at 09:51:37PM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On 1/9/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The directories themselves, nevermind the .mak files within them, should
have never existed in a source package.
So, what
On 1/10/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A final question for all, do we wish to install an arbitrary, on the fly self
signed default.crt/default.key? Do we want to help them fill out the details
or use stock details? Or do we want them to use openssl.exe to generate one
for
On 1/18/07, Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The mod_ftp PPMC has voted on graduation and it was approved[1].
We are now asking the httpd PMC to approve graduation.
+1.
One topic for discussion is whether it should be a subproject
of httpd (ala mod_mbox, mod_python, ...) or simply
On 2/5/07, John Cook [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I'm currently having issues with flood that I can't currently replicate
with any of my other load / stress testing tools.
I'm running a version of flood checked out of the subversion repository
from mid January (1/16/07) on an Unbutu 6.10
On 2/9/07, Jim Gallacher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Would it be possible to expand the proposal a little, whereby we would
become a TLP for python modules for httpd, rather than just mod_python
as a TLP?
Certainly!
At any rate, I'd be very happy to server on the new PMC, and if there a
lack of
On 2/14/07, Paul Querna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1 to giving it a code name; '3.0' to me is just an easy way to explain
'this is a major departure from the current 2.x'.
I vote for using Monsters Inc characters...say Sulley or Boo. =)
FWIW, I spawned this off Paul's suggestion on IRC of
On 2/14/07, Sander Temme [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My delightful pleasure. We can really go to town on this. Like,
neighborhoods and places in Amsterdam:
As long as we first teach httpd/Subversion how to deal with all of the
spelling mistakes from us trying to spell out Dutch words. I want
On 3/13/07, Marcus Bointon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm using flood to test a REST-style interface. The server uses the
Accept header to tell which kind of return value should be used -
e.g. text/html will return an interactive web interface, and text/xml
will return XML. In order to test the
On 3/13/07, Marcus Bointon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 13 Mar 2007, at 15:39, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
It's already there - set the 'extraheader' attribute in the URL.
Like so:
--
url extraheader=Accept=text/xmlhttp://www.example.com//url
Excellent, thanks.
Ergh, note that you might
On 3/14/07, Nick Kew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
to content size? Other than when the entire contents arrive in a
single bucket?
Uh, a file bucket? -- justin
On 3/23/07, Nick Kew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm developing a DBD-based DAV backend.
I've been trying to use lazy evaluation for efficiency.
But there are obstacles in the way.
I've just added an SQL query to my get_resource method
just to determine whether the resource is a collection.
I
On 3/22/07, Guenter Knauf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
I would find it useful to have the SVN revision info in the head of the sources;
and therefore I looked into it to see how its done with SVN:
1. the file needs a $id: $ tag.
2. the file needs a 'svn propset svn:keywords Id file'
3. the
On 4/7/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Graham Dumpleton wrote:
The person on the WSGI list is more or less claiming that there would
be no harm in a web server always applying chunked transfer encoding
to a response which doesn't specify a content length
Of course this
On 4/8/07, Henrik Nordstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So why is there a dependency on keep-alive being enabled?
If keep-alive is disabled for the connection, then Connection: Close
tends to be more efficient anyway... -- justin
On 5/9/07, Jojy Varghese [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We are currently exploring different strategies for testing an HTTP
server for different scenarios around HTTP protocol compliance and load
conditions. I was wondering if apache has a test suite for testing its http
server. Any help is much
On 5/17/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
@@ -298,6 +298,8 @@
http://people.apache.org/~jerenkrantz/max-age-2.2.x.patch
(Trivially conflicts with CacheIgnoreQueryString above.)
+1: jerenkrantz
+ rpluem asks: Why not backporting the adjusted error message
On 5/17/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+ rpluem : Now that CacheIgnoreQueryString has been backported r538807
+ applies cleanly to 2.2.x. So I assume it is ok to use
+ r538807 instead of max-age-2.2.x.patch.
Aye - that's fine and just
On 5/17/07, Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But it already does in the case of the Expires header. If the Expires
header is missing or bogus and no max-age field is present (valid or invalid),
we set one with the expires date the cache calculated (either heuristic or
default). And this
On 5/17/07, Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As Roy has already voted for it before I added my comment, I just wanted to give
him a chance to give a comment if he thinks that this is needed (in the same
way as
I wanted to give you a chance to comment). But in this simple case it may not
On 5/17/07, Niklas Edmundsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has there been any progress on PR41230? I submitted a patch that at
least seems to improve the situation that now seems to have seen some
testing by others as well.
As I have stated before, it would be really nice if a fix for this
could be
On 5/17/07, Roy T. Fielding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 17, 2007, at 2:53 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
BTW, I'm not a fan of us inventing Expires headers in this section of
code - I'd think it'd be far cleaner to off-load Expires response
header generation to mod_expires and leave
On 5/17/07, Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't want to pick on you, but ironically it was you who introduced this :-)
(http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrevision=152973).
Oh, it probably was. What can I say? I'm less stupid now. =)
Ok. So we should remove the
On 5/17/07, Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hm. In this case date would be undefined and it is used later on.
Oh. Good catch.
Maybe we should remove the else branch and set date = info-date in
any case so that it is either the contents of Date: or now.
Sure. That'll work.
See
On 5/17/07, Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
why. Also the entity is not physically removed from the cache if it is really
stale.
This does not matter in the non HEAD case as it gets overwritten by the fresh
response,
but in the HEAD case it should be physically removed IMO.
Well,
On 5/7/07, Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
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...
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
cache-handle or a cache-stale_handle. We have neither, as
On 5/18/07, Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
@@ -477,8 +477,10 @@
reason = No Last-Modified, Etag, or Expires headers;
}
else if (r-header_only) {
-/* HEAD requests */
-reason = HTTP HEAD request;
+/* Forbid HEAD requests unless we have it
On 5/17/07, Niklas Edmundsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has there been any progress on PR41230? I submitted a patch that at
least seems to improve the situation that now seems to have seen some
testing by others as well.
As I have stated before, it would be really nice if a fix for this
could
On 5/24/07, Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
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
On 5/24/07, Jorge Schrauwen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe one rule that states that {INSERT AUTHERIZED PEOPLE HERE} can
make a decision on a dispute. Example: some external link that provide
bad/false or not prefured information.
If that person/persons decide the link needs to go it should.
On 5/31/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: covener
Date: Thu May 31 18:38:49 2007
New Revision: 543351
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=543351
Log:
add myself to contributor list
Modified:
httpd/site/trunk/docs/contributors/index.html
You need to modify
On 7/17/07, Chris Haumesser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is the above still an accurate statement of attachment handling status in
mod_mbox? If so, does anyone know what it would take to add this
functionality? Anyone interested in helping us for a modest bounty?
This should be fixed in
On 8/6/07, Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ummm... These didn't have 3 +1 votes.
So why were they applied and committed??
I think for platform-specific code we've been okay with a smaller
consensus than 3.
If our only two NetWare guys agree on the change, then I doubt the
rest of us
On Sep 27, 2007 9:22 AM, Jorge Schrauwen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I could provide x64 binaries if there is interest in them. I usually push
them out to my site within a week of the source release.
I'm not 100% sure my method of creating them is the same as the ASF's but I
can change my way if
On Oct 2, 2007 11:52 AM, Paul Querna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, the first step is to cut out any illusion that new features are
going into 1.3, with a statement like this:
Starting in January 2008, only critical security issues will be fixed in
Apache HTTP Server versions 1.3.x or 2.0.x.
On Oct 3, 2007 7:20 AM, Henrik Nordstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
deflates the contents. Rationale: a weak ETag promises
equivalent but not byte-by-byte identical contents, and
that's exactly what you have with mod_deflate.
I disagree. It's two very different entities.
As before, I still
On Oct 3, 2007 12:19 PM, Roy T. Fielding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't see how that is possible, unless subversion is depending
on content-encoding to twiddle between compressed and uncompressed
transfer without changing the etag. In that case, subversion will be
broken, as would any
On Nov 13, 2007 6:06 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree here. While I would see a benefit of providing a http(s) client
API to httpd via serf and thus getting rid of the somewhat strange
way mod_proxy_http does its requests to a backend system ,I see no
benefit at all
On Nov 13, 2007 11:10 AM, Mads Toftum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The name makes me think of it as a provider module like httpd - in fact
I think that'd be quite useful (especially going by Justins reluctance
to add it to apr-util which would have been my preferred location).
Exposing some
On Nov 14, 2007 8:17 AM, Graham Leggett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But if what httpd asks of serf deviates so far from the standard serf
library that we need to fork our own version of serf, then we will start
having all sorts of problems.
If you look at the committer roster of serf
On Nov 14, 2007 9:06 AM, Issac Goldstand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ ] Immediate adoption as an included module (pending IP clearance via
the incubator)
[X] Immediate adoption as a subproject (pending IP clearance via the
incubator)
- But, no separate mailing lists and no separate committers
On Nov 14, 2007 9:16 AM, Davi Arnaut [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Under (or not) the Apache umbrella?
As Greg and I have stated, we know that the long-term home for Serf is
in Apache. However, we're slowly building a viable community to be
built around Serf that could withstand any single person's
On Nov 14, 2007 9:07 AM, Issac Goldstand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, not to overstate the obvious, but aren't we implying here that
serf will become an integral part of apr-util (at least that's what I'd
understood)? As such, serf wouldn't be forked as much as absorbed...
IMO, serf is and
On Nov 14, 2007 4:18 PM, Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+b = APR_BRIGADE_FIRST(ctx-bb);
+status = apr_bucket_read(b, data, len, APR_BLOCK_READ);
Isn't it dangerous that we do not copy *data here?
Doesn't this data get lost when we delete the bucket in the while loop below?
On Nov 15, 2007 12:10 PM, Mladen Turk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If the guys committing those stuff can share some light
to the rest of us, perhaps we could participate as well.
The path we're going down (for now) is making serf the core
input/output filtering mechanism. In a conversation here
On Nov 15, 2007 12:17 PM, Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And in the case above we only read the data from ser_in_bucket, but unlike in
the AP_MODE_READBYTES
case we do not create a transient bucket with data and add it to the bb
brigade. So the
caller gets back an empty brigade
On Nov 15, 2007 7:00 PM, Graham Leggett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is the plan to remove the filtering mechanism entirely, or just the
filters that make HTTP happen?
I honestly don't know yet. =) -- justin
On Nov 16, 2007 5:56 AM, Mladen Turk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK cool. Will you guys put serf in ASF, or is it going to
stay at Google?
As I mentioned before, the only place serf would go is back 'home' to
Apache. But, that is predicated on the presence of a healthy
community to manage and
On Nov 26, 2007 4:28 PM, Roy T. Fielding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Generally speaking, if someone tells you to do something in IRC
then it is almost certainly the wrong thing to do -- just like
decisions made in boring meetings.
Philip said he never intended to commit it.
The right thing to
On Nov 26, 2007 8:01 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
Once we switched our code to supporting external PCREs, in my opinion,
we should have just dropped the whole vendor branch concept as it
serves no legitimate purpose any more. If the PCRE guys
On Nov 26, 2007 8:46 PM, Roy T. Fielding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Okay with me. All we need now is a volunteer to figure out what
(if any) changes are needed to use a separately installed PCRE.
All hail Guido's time machine than has been hijacked by Joe. =) -- justin
% ./configure --help |
On Dec 4, 2007 5:15 AM, Martin Kraemer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The usernames in WIN32 are, IIRC , case insensitive (and they are in
BS2000, and perhaps in OS2?).
I don't get it - why should usernames be case-insensitive? There's no
involvement of the Win32 (OS/2, z/OS, Netware, etc.) API here
On Dec 5, 2007 8:36 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* My test case lead to the exceptional situation of a very large passbb
bucket brigade
(about 1,000,000 buckets) as a result of processing 4 MB of the file. So I
add
a flush bucket once I have more than MAX_BUCKET
On Dec 10, 2007 10:42 PM, Stefan Fritsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, that works as well. I wanted to avoid calling APR_BRIGADE_PREPEND
when the temporary brigade is empty. But I don't really know whether
APR_BRIGADE_PREPEND is so expensive that this makes sense. An
alternative would be to
--On October 11, 2005 1:24:22 PM -0400 Joshua Slive [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As has been pointed out, this is a trade off. You can get real
protection at the cost of losing the ability to find real email
addresses. Or you can get protection that will work against 95% or more
of current
On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 08:20:40AM -0700, Sander Temme wrote:
The httpd-2.0.55 RC currently running on ajax had a segfault about an
hour ago, here's the backtrace.
Looks like a crash in mod_mobx, so I don't think it affects the httpd
release.
Paul, Sam, and I analyzed the cores and
On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 01:31:42PM -0700, Sander Temme wrote:
There is now:
[Wed Oct 12 22:04:43 2005] [notice] child pid 5885 exit signal =20
Segmentation fault (11), possible coredump in /raid1/httpd-cores
Backtrace:
...
Note, this was /raid1/httpd-cores/core.5885 .
(gdb) print
On Sat, Oct 15, 2005 at 12:08:15PM -0700, Paul Querna wrote:
Except when we get a HEAD request, r-path_info is filled with bogus
data, which causes mod_mbox to crash way deep inside itself.
Why isn't r-path_info filled out correctly?
If the request's path_info itself is bogus, that should be
--On October 20, 2005 2:37:39 PM -0400 Greg Ames [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I think that's a good philosophy. unfortunately, if I read the only
developer doc I can find on Apache filters
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.0/developer/filters.html I don't see any
rules about what to do when your
--On October 21, 2005 12:49:48 AM +0200 Maxime Petazzoni
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As you can see in the latest commit (r327019), we've set up a small
hack to avoid mod_mbox from wrapping messages larger than 50k.
I don't get it. Why is mod_mbox wrapping any text to begin with? This is
the
--On October 21, 2005 1:09:28 AM +0200 Maxime Petazzoni
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've just commited a small changeset in order to compute the string
length only once in the function. But yes, we could rely on the
computed length earlier in the body processing.
I wonder if fixing the loop
--On October 21, 2005 4:29:36 PM +0200 Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
like to propose this patch for backport. As I am only committer am I
allowed
- to add it to the 2.0.x STATUS file
- add my (of course non binding) vote on this backport?
FWIW, your vote *is* binding and counts
--On October 21, 2005 11:34:47 PM +0200 Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Sorry, but I am confused. I thought only PMC members have binding votes.
Or is my vote binding because I proposed the backport?
Since you have commit access to httpd, the intent is for you to be able to
vote on
On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 01:41:18PM +0100, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
If I might also ask, would anyone mind if;
./configure --with-apr=bundled --with-apr-util=bundled
were added as options? Right now APR_FIND_APU and APR_FIND_APR are given
1 as the third argument, which means that if
On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 01:22:36PM +0100, Joe Orton wrote:
There was a thread about this previously; just checking for consensus,
is there any objection to bumping the apr/apr-util version requirements
to 1.2.x? (1.2.x is already required for mod_dbd, event MP, and it will
simplify the
On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 08:52:35AM -0400, Jeff Trawick wrote:
3 days is maybe enough time to catch a couple of build issues that we
didn't see, but not anything else. I don't see the value in making a
big deal about it to the general public if the thing is likely to be
GA before there is time
--On October 26, 2005 1:49:15 AM +0200 Maxime Petazzoni
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In the light of the issue reported by noodl at
http://eul113.eu.verio.net/~noodl/apache_issues.txt I decided to
implement multiple AuthUserFile support.
I don't get it.
mod_authn_alias is the solution here.
On Sun, Oct 30, 2005 at 03:28:43PM +0100, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
I guess this is the big problem. I tried with the latest and it did not
work. Do you know a version number of gdb where it works? I already googled
for
it, but I was not able to find it.
I thought you needed RH-specific patches
On Sat, Oct 29, 2005 at 09:09:46PM -0700, Paul Querna wrote:
2.1.9-Beta is available from:
http://people.apache.org/~pquerna/dev/httpd-2.1.9/
Please test and vote on releasing 2.1.9 as BETA.
+1 for beta.
Passes httpd-test on Ubuntu breezy/ppc. -- justin
On Sun, Oct 30, 2005 at 10:14:29AM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
They persist on /trunk/ if anyone wants to revisit them. In the interim,
they can simply be blasted on /branches/2.1.x/ - no?
Yes, that is the plan I think we agreed on. -- justin
--On November 2, 2005 7:46:10 PM + Colm MacCarthaigh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
The only viable way anyway. I've been looking at this for a few months,
since I first reported to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (still waiting on a
response) and have tried to construct the logic on the authz side, but
Um,
--On November 3, 2005 8:44:02 PM +0100 Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I also agree with this. While I understand the performance benefits from
the developer perspective, I fear the confusion from the user and
administrators perspective. Having a clear configuration is not only
about
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 08:03:56PM -0500, Joshua Slive wrote:
it seems there is no way to work around client protocol problems. (Just
sending Vary: User-Agent wouldn't fix the problem, because when the user
agent matched a cached variant, the protocol adjustments still wouldn't
be
--On November 7, 2005 11:09:05 PM +0100 Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
must be HTTP compliant, but there should be possibilties (and there
already are) to
break this compliance with explicit configuration options to get some
things working.
Yes, CacheStorePrivate will do this. --
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 07:48:07AM +0100, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
So do you think that there is a todo for mod_authz_host to add such things
or should this be left to the administrator who can of course use
mod_headers in the first case to add Cache-Control: private?
It'd be nice if
--On November 3, 2005 4:54:08 PM + Nick Kew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just to elaborate on that, it's the name I'm not happy about.
I'm perfectly happy with the /modules/aaa/ classification.
The problem is that mod_access does not indicate the purpose of the module.
access to what? What
--On November 3, 2005 4:50:08 PM + Nick Kew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So can mod_rewrite and others, but that doesn't make it mod_authz_url!
Perhaps mod_load_average should be called mod_authz_busy ?
No, mod_authz_host only does authorization checks. mod_rewrite can do
anything...
--On November 8, 2005 7:21:54 PM -0500 Geoffrey Young
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
you really think so? I think it's mistakenly given an authz namespace,
giving users the impression it steps in after authentication, or does
something else specifically based on r-user. at least any users who have
--On November 9, 2005 7:25:13 PM -0800 Roy T. Fielding [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
o I thought I understood the auth/authn/authnz/authz split,
but looking at the files makes me confused again. The docs
seem to be the config.m4 file. Only a third of the auth
source files
--On November 9, 2005 9:25:20 PM + Nick Kew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It runs with the access_checker/auth_checker hook.
That's two hooks of course, and not even contiguous.
I disagree. Access checker and auth checker perform almost identical
functions. There is no reason why we
On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 10:37:47AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
# (pending) httpd version
-httpd.version=2.1.9
+httpd.version=2.2.0
So, what exactly does this do?
It'd be really nice to have just one place to change the version number.
But, even after chasing this property for a while, I
On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 11:58:09AM +0100, Andr Malo wrote:
Good point. I haven't figured out yet a way to unify the code and docs trees
in this regard (docco folks typically have only the docs tree checked out).
I honestly don't care if it is unified. A single value to change in the
docs tree
--On November 15, 2005 10:01:09 AM -0500 Joshua Slive [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
changing a default like this on a 2.0 to 2.2 upgrade, and I'd prefer it
you put it back to off.
+1. -- justin
--On November 15, 2005 6:41:13 PM + [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
@@ -97,12 +95,12 @@
tr
tda href=#testTest/a/td
-tdcode$ emPREFIX/em/bin/apachectl start/code
+tdcode$ emPREFIX/em/bin/apachectl -k start/code
Really? That'd be the right syntax for httpd, but
--On November 15, 2005 7:39:20 PM + [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: jim
Date: Tue Nov 15 11:39:15 2005
New Revision: 344416
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=344416view=rev
Log:
Fold in the UseCanonicalPhysicalPort code, along with the
docs changes (just source currently)
This
201 - 300 of 1873 matches
Mail list logo
