On Wed, 9 Nov 2011, Rainer Jung wrote:
To recall: that would mean the LoadModule lines for the following modules are
the only ones *not* commented out in the default config (including latest
feedback):
access_compat_module
alias_module
allowmethods_module
auth_basic_module
authn_core_module
au
Hi,
I intend to set MaxMemFree by default. The reason is that some modules use
a lot of memory for a few requests (e.g. mod_dav, mod_php). With
MaxMemFree disabled, the allocators will grow to the size
necessary to serve the most memory intensive type of request and never
shrink again. And si
On Thu, 10 Nov 2011, Joe Orton wrote:
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 06:28:00PM -0800, Jeff Trawick wrote:
* There should have been a discussion on dev@ before promoting a
subproject to the main distribution.
* Two weeks before 2.4 GA (well, that's the general desire of those of
the group that spoke u
Hi Roy,
please post your config.log and build/config_vars.mk somewhere on
people.apache.org.
Cheers,
Stefan
On Thu, 10 Nov 2011, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
I am getting the following on OS X Lion:
Installing configuration files
/bin/sh: ,authn_file,: command not found
/bin/sh: ,authn_dbm,: com
Hi,
we were told by pgollucci that there is already a Windows build bot at the
ASF. It would be awesome if someone knowledgable in Windows could work
with the Infra guys to set it up. The mail address is bui...@apache.org
according to Philip.
Cheers,
Stefan
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011, Greg Ames wrote:
I intend to set MaxMemFree by default.
+1.
What about a way to view allocator memory use? per child totals in
mod_status would be most excellent.
Sure. We should try to put the necessary infrastructure into apr 1.5 and
then support it in mod_status an
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011, Paul Querna wrote:
I noticed in www.apache.org/server-status that there was a worker with
a single connection open, all the others had been gracefully closed.
However, it'd been in that state for an hour.
GDB attached to it, backtrace here:
https://gist.github.com/be2271
On Wed, 9 Nov 2011, Jim Jagielski wrote:
The 2.3.15-beta (prerelease) tarballs are available for download at test:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as 2.3.15-beta BETA and,
with luck, this will be our last beta and the next release in ~2weeks
or le
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011, Gregg L. Smith wrote:
Stefan,
Which build problem? mod_lua?, I've never seen release blocked on a a
Yes, I meant the missing include path.
alpha/beta nor do I remember screaming and blocking a release by a simple
problem with a module, libhttpd is a whole different matt
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
I think 4MB could be a reasonable default for MaxMemFree.
Were you considering that in terms of a 64 or 32 bit arch? Guessing
that from alignment and ptr sizes, there will be some impact.
I didn't intend to handle that differently.
We default
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011, Paul Querna wrote:
After r1201149, we now lock for lots of things, where in an ideal
case, we shouldn't need it.
I agree that that's not optimal, but it is no regression. Event always
used locking for the timeout queues. But what we really should do in 2.4.0
is remove all
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011, Rainer Jung wrote:
I wouldn't call that "final", since, well it obviously isn't.
We should send a clear message here, simply saying:
- no more features
- no more bugfixes, except security related ones
- no more anything after, e.g., 31.12.2012
And we should mean it. If tha
On Sat, 12 Nov 2011, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
locking for the timeout queues. But what we really should do in 2.4.0 is
remove all the MPM-implementation specific details from conn_state_t. The
only field that is actually used outside of the MPMs is 'state'. If we make
the rest non-
Hi Steffen,
On Mon, 14 Nov 2011, Steffen wrote:
The issue below seems not to be related to SSL.
Tested in different non-SSL configs with eg.
RewriteRule /sysadmin(.*) http://%{HTTP_HOST}:81/sysadmin$1 [P,L]
And different servers as the back, Sambar, Surge, DManager and Apache.
Sometimes it w
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011, pque...@apache.org wrote:
Author: pquerna
Date: Tue Nov 15 15:49:19 2011
New Revision: 1202255
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1202255&view=rev
Log:
disable mod_reqtimeout if not configured
Why that? We have just changed the default to be enabled in r1199447 and
se
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011, pque...@apache.org wrote:
Author: pquerna
Date: Tue Nov 15 15:50:09 2011
New Revision: 1202256
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1202256&view=rev
Log:
Instead of disabling the listening sockets from the pollset when under
load, just stop calling the accept call, but le
On Tuesday 15 November 2011, Paul Querna wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 9:17 AM, Stefan Fritsch
wrote:
> > On Tue, 15 Nov 2011, pque...@apache.org wrote:
> >> Author: pquerna
> >> Date: Tue Nov 15 15:49:19 2011
> >> New Revision: 1202255
> >>
>
On Monday 14 November 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 11/14/2011 12:31 PM, Steffen wrote:
> > The issue below seems not to be related to SSL.
> >
> > Tested in different non-SSL configs with eg.
> > RewriteRule /sysadmin(.*) http://%{HTTP_HOST}:81/sysadmin$1 [P,L]
> >
> > And different serv
On Wednesday 16 November 2011, Paul Querna wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 2:44 AM, Rainer Jung
wrote:
> > On 15.11.2011 20:57, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> >> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 2:32 PM, William A. Rowe Jr.
> >>
> >> wrote:
> >>> On 11/15/2011 1
On Wednesday 16 November 2011, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> > What I am really opposed to is that the LoadModule causes such a
> > degradation in performance.
>
> In my quick (and maybe not that accurate) tests, the penalty caused
> by mod_reqtimeout (1.4%) was smaller th
On Wednesday 16 November 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> Were these results all based on 100% cpu pegged?
Yes, the machine running httpd had both cores at 100%. The machine
running ab had a single core at ~ 70%.
On Wednesday 16 November 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 11/16/2011 10:20 AM, Paul Querna wrote:
> > I am 100% +1 to adding conf commands to the default configuration
> > in the httpd.conf, but what I do not like is that having just a
> > LoadModule with nothing else causes reqtimeout to do w
Hi,
in case any of you also have lots of test failures with libwww-perl 6.0.3,
setting these env vars fixes most of them for me:
PERL_NET_HTTPS_SSL_SOCKET_CLASS=Net::SSL
PERL_LWP_SSL_VERIFY_HOSTNAME=0
No idea why Net::SSL works but IO::Socket::SSL doesn't. The remaining
failures are
On Friday 18 November 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> Resource abuse of an .htaccess config in the form of
> cpu/memory/bandwidth;
>
>[ ] Represents a security defect
>[X] Is not a security defect
>
> This would obviously need to be clarified in the associated
> .htaccess documentati
On Friday 18 November 2011, Graham Leggett wrote:
> > besides the ugliness of updating conn_rec, are there known
> > functional drawbacks of the existing mechanism, assuming that
> > the module which sets the client also sets a note to allow
> > logging of the TCP peer if desired?
There is also th
On Friday 18 November 2011, Kaspar Brand wrote:
> "all" simply stands for "+SSLv3 +TLSv1",
> so we might just leave the default config as is - i.e., not have
> any SSLProtocol directive in docs/conf/extra/httpd-ssl.conf.
We may have "TLSv1.1" "and TLSv1.2" in the future. Changing the
default con
On Saturday 19 November 2011, Graham Leggett wrote:
> > The correction is simple; promote the remote_ip up to the request
> > rec and log/use for authentication that r->remote_ip throughout
> > httpd. Introduce a wire client logging tag for c->remote_ip.
>
> This is a lot simpler and cleaner I th
On Fri, 18 Nov 2011, traw...@apache.org wrote:
Author: trawick
Date: Fri Nov 18 13:10:06 2011
New Revision: 1203634
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1203634&view=rev
Log:
add conn_rec to error log hook
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/server/log.c?rev=1203634&r1=1203
On Sun, 20 Nov 2011, Graham Leggett wrote:
Having just brought trunk up to date, I am currently getting the following
segfault below, not sure if this is related to r1204104?
Yes it is, I overlooked one use of cs. Fixed in r1204180.
On Monday 21 November 2011, Rüdiger Plüm wrote:
> Original-Nachricht
> Betreff: svn commit: r1204087 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk:
> include/ap_expr.h include/ap_mmn.h server/util_expr_eval.c
> server/util_expr_parse.c server/util_expr_parse.y
> Datum:Sat, 19 Nov 2011 21:5
On Sunday 20 November 2011, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 3:41 AM, Stefan Fritsch
wrote:
> > Would it make sense to pass the ap_errorlog_info struct instead?
> > It has contains most of the args and is extensible with only a
> > minor MMN bump.
>
> (s
On Sunday 20 November 2011, Graham Leggett wrote:
> On 20 Nov 2011, at 1:37 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 2:46 PM, Stefan Fritsch
> >
> > wrote:
> >> On Saturday 19 November 2011, Graham Leggett wrote:
> >>>> The correcti
On Monday 21 November 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 11/21/2011 4:49 AM, Steffen wrote:
> > Observing that the error.log is filling with [http:error] lines,
> > never seen with 2.2:
> >
> > [http:error] [pid 3244:tid 2656] (70007)The timeout specified has
> > expired: [client 114.79.60.32:1
On Monday 21 November 2011, Reindl Harald wrote:
> > Steffen, the default for Timeout has been reduced from 300 to 60.
> > If you get complaints from users, the new value may be too low
> > and we should maybe reconsider the new value.
>
> hi
>
> we are using "Timout 60" since a long time with 2
On Tuesday 22 November 2011, j...@apache.org wrote:
> Author: jim
> Date: Tue Nov 22 14:02:25 2011
> New Revision: 1204998
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1204998&view=rev
> Log:
> Hello. Let's compile again.
>
> Modified:
> httpd/httpd/trunk/server/util_expr_eval.c
>
> Modified: h
On Tuesday 22 November 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> > +/*
> > + * To reduce counting overhead, we only count calls to
> > + * ap_expr_eval_word() and ap_expr_eval(). The max number of
> > + * stack frames is larger by some factor.
> > + */
> > +#define AP_EXPR_MAX_RECURSION 20
> > +static i
On Tuesday 22 November 2011, Graham Leggett wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> With the imminent arrival of v2.4, is it worth going on a style
> cleanup of the codebase and fix any glaring differences?
>
> If we did want to do so, now would be the time.
I think it's already too late. It would now make backpor
On Tuesday 22 November 2011, Nick Kew wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 08:41:24 -0500
>
> Jim Jagielski wrote:
> > I had hoped that we could have gotten 2.4.0 out kinda soon, but
> > with the wild-west kind of commits going on, there is a LOT
> > of stuff changed, willy-nilly, between 2.3.15-beta and
Hi,
from a cursory glance at mod_request and apreq, it seems that
mod_request offers a subset of the functionality of apreq. Graham, is
that correct?
If we aim for inclusion of apreq some time in 2.4.x, it may be a good
idea to not add another API for the same thing. Maybe we could
document t
On Tuesday 22 November 2011, Rainer Jung wrote:
> On 22.11.2011 10:28, Steffen wrote:
> > Seeing a huge number of hanging entries in the Server Status,
> > already for 20 hours and looks they are staying there forever.
> >
> > The requests are invalid, not sure since I do not keep the raw
> > logs
Hi Steffen,
thanks for your testing and your feed-back.
On Tuesday 22 November 2011, Steffen wrote:
> Other log entries which I did not see in 2.2 with loglevel notice.
>
>
> [:warn] [pid 3800:tid 2216] (OS 10054)An existing connection was
> forcibly closed by the remote host. : [client
> 220.
On Tuesday 22 November 2011, Graham Leggett wrote:
> On 21 Nov 2011, at 8:04 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> > Looks reasonable. Some comments:
> >
> > The error log handler log_remote_address for %a needs to fall
> > back to c->remote_ip if r is not specified. Otherwis
On Tuesday 22 November 2011, Graham Leggett wrote:
> On 13 Feb 2011, at 9:59 AM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> > On Feb 12, 2011, at 6:03 PM, minf...@apache.org wrote:
> >> Author: minfrin
> >> Date: Sun Feb 13 02:03:29 2011
> >> New Revision: 1070179
> >>
> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=107
On Tuesday 22 November 2011, Nick Kew wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 22:17:50 +0100
>
> Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> > There are two API changes left that I would like to have in 2.4:
> >
> > - add r->remote_ip
>
> Huh? Surely tcp details belong to the conne
On Wednesday 23 November 2011, Graham Leggett wrote:
> On 23 Nov 2011, at 8:22 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
> >> This has the additional advantage of *breaking* existing
> >> c->remote_ip references and forcing the module author to choose
> >> which they mean for
> >> their purposes (most would refer to the
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011, j...@apache.org wrote:
Author: jim
Date: Wed Nov 23 15:01:42 2011
New Revision: 1205423
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1205423&view=rev
Log:
Use ap_pass_brigade_fchk()
Modified:
httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/cache/mod_cache.c
httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/mappers/mod_
Hi,
docs/icons/apache_pb2* contain the version number (2.2), in the case
of docs/icons/apache_pb2_ani.gif it's even an animation.
Any volunteers for changing these to 2.4?
Cheers,
Stefan
On Thu, 24 Nov 2011, j...@apache.org wrote:
Author: jim
Date: Thu Nov 24 15:53:16 2011
New Revision: 1205894
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1205894&view=rev
Log:
Use varargs...
Modified:
httpd/httpd/trunk/include/util_filter.h
httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/cache/mod_cache.c
httpd/h
On Sunday 27 November 2011, Rich Bowen wrote:
> At Apachecon several of us were discussing how error messages could
> be made more helpful without making them paragraphs. Two
> suggestions were made - adding a URL to the message or adding a
> number/code to each error that would then be looked up f
Hi,
while browsing a bit through Michael Zalewski's new Tangled Web book,
I was reminded again that we are very forgiving about what we accept
as a request. Is this really a good idea in the time of lots of web
security issues?
Examples include:
* in the request line, the protocol may be arbi
On Monday 28 November 2011, Nick Kew wrote:
> On 28 Nov 2011, at 00:37, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > while browsing a bit through Michael Zalewski's new Tangled Web
> > book, I was reminded again that we are very forgiving about what
> > we accept as
On Sunday 13 November 2011, Nick Kew wrote:
> Indeed, checking those return values would be better. May have
> been lost when I separated out the i18n code from its origins in
> markup filtering.
I have added some error checks and a few ap_asserts(). Do you want to
review it before I merge it in
On Tuesday 29 November 2011, Igor Galić wrote:
> > I hope that other vendors will pick up our packaging as the
> > "canonical" way, and improve the way httpd is deployed out there.
>
> +1
>
> sf - how are you planning to do this, btw ;)
I think we are going to drop the separate MPM packages and
On Tuesday 29 November 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 11/27/2011 8:34 AM, Rich Bowen wrote:
> > At Apachecon several of us were discussing how error messages
> > could be made more helpful without making them paragraphs. Two
> > suggestions were made - adding a URL to the message or adding a
On Tuesday 29 November 2011, Kaspar Brand wrote:
> On 23.11.2011 15:06, Joe Orton wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 08:37:31AM +0100, Kaspar Brand wrote:
> >> There are two approaches to fix 1): a) turn off verify_hostname
> >> where needed (t/ssl/pr12355.t and t/ssl/pr43738.t are doing this
> >>
On Tuesday 29 November 2011, Graham Leggett wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've noticed some warnings in mod_xml2enc:
>
> mod_xml2enc.c: In function 'fix_skipto':
> mod_xml2enc.c:123:18: warning: variable 'rv' set but not used
> [-Wunused-but-set-variable] mod_xml2enc.c: In function
> 'sniff_encoding':
> m
On Monday 28 November 2011, Rich Bowen wrote:
> On Nov 28, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> > A question on procedure: Do you want to add all error codes at
> > once and then fill in the descriptions or add the error codes as
> > the documentation evolves? If the f
On Wednesday 30 November 2011, Guenter Knauf wrote:
> Am 30.11.2011 01:51, schrieb William A. Rowe Jr.:
> > On 11/29/2011 5:30 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> >> Currently my scripts produces:
> >>
> >> http://people.apache.org/~sf/error-msg-numbers.diff
> &g
On Wednesday 30 November 2011, Mikhail T. wrote:
> On 29.11.2011 23:30, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> > But my point remains, that we allocate each module a block of
> > some 50 codes, such that mod_aaa gets AHM-0049 and mod_aab
> > gets 50-99, etc.
>
> How will 3rd-party modules be getting the
On Wednesday 30 November 2011, Tim Bannister wrote:
> On 27 Nov 2011, at 17:14, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> > Yes, that would be a good idea and I agree with Daniel that we
> > should use a distinct prefix or format. We currently have around
> > 2700 calls to *_log_?error in trunk
On Wednesday 30 November 2011, Graham Leggett wrote:
> On 30 Nov 2011, at 9:21 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> > I'm not suggesting changing the alpha prefix. Just block out
> > ranges so that any listing of the codes is grouped by module that
> > emits them.
>
> From my experience, any attempt
On Friday 02 December 2011, Graham Leggett wrote:
> On 03 Dec 2011, at 12:42 AM, minf...@apache.org wrote:
> > Author: minfrin
> > Date: Fri Dec 2 22:42:39 2011
> > New Revision: 1209754
> >
> >
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1209754&view=rev
> > Log:
> > mod_proxy: Make ap_proxy_r
On Thursday 01 December 2011, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> Any more comments/thoughts?
As nobody disagreed, this is now in trunk. I intend to commit it to
2.4 tomorrow.
It's already a big step forward and the finishing touches can be done
in 2.4.1.
Hi,
where are we WRT 2.4?
Blockers:
mod_proxy_scgi.c needs to be fixed for compilation with C89 (easy)
The only blocker left in STATUS is this:
* Modules that are not ready for production use must be removed.
The same for modules without documentation.
I think we have already removed
On Saturday 03 December 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 12/3/2011 1:32 AM, Gregg L. Smith wrote:
> > On 12/2/2011 3:48 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> >> - the follwing modules added since 2.2 lack documentation
> >>
> >> - mod_socache_dbm
> >> -
On Saturday 03 December 2011, Nick Kew wrote:
> On 2 Dec 2011, at 23:19, s...@apache.org wrote:
> > Modified:
> >httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/include/ap_mmn.h
> >httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/include/http_log.h
>
> [...]
>
> > + * 20111202.1 (2.5.0-dev) add APLOGNO()
>
> 2.4 or 2.5?
Changed
On Sun, 4 Dec 2011, Jim Jagielski wrote:
There seems to be a lot of renewed effort in getting 2.4/trunk is a
really releasable state, which is all Goodness. Ideally, I'd like
to release 2.4.0 before the end of the year, but starting off
2012 with a new httpd release also makes some sense as well.
mod_slotmem_plain "plain"
mod_slotmem_shm "shared" !
mod_socache_dbm "dbm"
mod_socache_dc "dc"
mod_socache_memcache"mc" !
mod_socache_shmcb "shmcb"
Should we align the provider names with the module names? E.g. change
"shared" to "shm" and
On Sunday 04 December 2011, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> I also
> need to look at the event changes as well in trunk to see if
> they are in 2.4.0 as well (or if they are something we could
> easily add post 2.4.0)...
The event changes in trunk are not ready for 2.4, see
http://mail-archives.apache.org
On Wednesday 07 December 2011, Kaspar Brand wrote:
> These changes aren't doing the right thing, I think... both
> ssl_log_ssl_error() and ssl_log_cert_error() are basically wrappers
> for ap_log_*(), and are therefore called from various places in
> mod_ssl - i.e. the messages triggering them shou
On Sunday 11 December 2011, Graham Leggett wrote:
> On 11 Dec 2011, at 15:01, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> > Now that apu-1.4.1 is close to release, it looks like we are
> > close to being able to have our 1st RC for 2.4.0...
> >
> > My plan is to T&R sometime this week...
>
> +1.
BTW, is there any r
On Tuesday 13 December 2011, Guenter Knauf wrote:
> Hi Stefan,
>
> Am 05.12.2011 10:38, schrieb s...@apache.org:
> > Author: sf
> > Date: Mon Dec 5 09:38:44 2011
> > New Revision: 1210378
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1210378&view=rev
> > Log:
> > Fix a few compiler warning repor
On Thursday 15 December 2011, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> The 2.3.16-beta (prerelease) tarballs are available for download at
> test:
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
>
> I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as 2.3.16-beta BETA and,
> with luck, this IS our last beta and the next release i
Hi Steffen,
On Saturday 17 December 2011, Steffen wrote:
> Here the Win64 warnings attached.
>
> Quite a lot, 442.
Most of these are conversions between various integer types. I think
the majority of these are in fact correct code. It would be quite a
lot of worth to fix these and I am not sur
On Sunday 18 December 2011, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> On Dec 18, 2011, at 11:53 AM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> > On Thursday 15 December 2011, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> >> The 2.3.16-beta (prerelease) tarballs are available for download
> >> at
> >>
> >> t
On Wed, 21 Dec 2011, Greg Ames wrote:
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 4:26 AM, William A. Rowe Jr.
wrote:
We should come to a conclusion on this.
How about this for 2.2.x ?
--- server/util.c (revision 1179624)
+++ server/util.c (working copy)
@@ -82,6 +82,8 @@
#define IS_SLASH(s) (s ==
Hi,
> Author: sf
> Date: Wed Dec 28 14:54:49 2011
> New Revision: 1225199
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1225199&view=rev
> Log:
> Check during configtest that the directories for error logs exist
>
> Testing under Windows is welcome
>
> PR: 29941
I think that the combination of ap_
On Wednesday 28 December 2011, Rüdiger Plüm wrote:
> Author: sf
> Date: Wed Dec 28 14:54:49 2011
> New Revision: 1225199
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1225199&view=rev
> Log:
> Check during configtest that the directories for error logs exist
>
> Testing under Windows is welcome
>
>
On Wednesday 28 December 2011, Mario Brandt wrote:
> I guess it is now r1225223 ?
Yes, r1225199 plus r1225223.
On Wednesday 28 December 2011, Mario Brandt wrote:
> Since 2.3.? there is this nice overview table in the server-status
> page. http://www.images-hack.de/bild.php/15079,statusKCQ3G.png
>
> Since it shows the status for apache working with threads. Why I
> see that only with event mpm, and not with
On Wednesday 16 November 2011, Steffen wrote:
> What I noticed, it is connecting to a port by a formerly used
> proxied connection (port 7080 instead of 81);
>
> Summary log:
>
> [proxy:debug] [pid 8680:tid 2668] proxy_util.c(2140): proxy: HTTP:
> has acquired connection for (*)
> [proxy:debug]
On Monday 02 January 2012, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Henri Yandell (Created) (JIRA) wrote on Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at
06:03:30 +:
> > Note list name on mail detail page
> > --
> >
> > Key: INFRA-4238
> > URL:
> > http
On Sun, 1 Jan 2012, Eric Covener wrote:
Can anyone more familiar with the code verify this? Steffen, maybe you
can try the change and see if it helps?
I think there are a few additional wrinkles -- I couldn't repro after
this but no confident about what's right with the addr handling:
http://
On Monday 02 January 2012, Takashi Sato wrote:
> mod_heartbeat
> mod_heartmonitor
> mod_lbmethod_heartbeat
>
> These have no documentation.
> Is that OK we release GA with no docs modules?
I am +0.5 for removing them from 2.4.0. They can be re-added when
someone writes the docs. Other opinions?
On Sunday 01 January 2012, Steffen wrote:
> Also IMHO blocking GA:
>
> - SSL on windows not usable
> - Hanging "logging" workers
> - Rewrite P
> On Sunday 01/01/2012 at 19:03, Mario Brandt wrote:
> > The loadbalancer still crashes on windows. See
> > https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.c
On Tuesday 03 January 2012, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 1/2/2012 4:10 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> > On Sunday 01 January 2012, Steffen wrote:
> >> Also IMHO blocking GA:
> >>
> >> - SSL on windows not usable
> >> - Hanging "logging" work
On Tuesday 03 January 2012, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 1/3/2012 3:30 AM, Steffen wrote:
> > Still, I want to ask to reconsider going back to the 2.2 behavior
> > (for the time being).
>
> Highly unlikely for the reasons I responded nearly a year or so
> back. This bug is irritating, but it is
On Thursday 05 January 2012, wr...@apache.org wrote:
> Author: wrowe
> Date: Thu Jan 5 21:55:43 2012
> New Revision: 1227860
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1227860&view=rev
> Log:
> Cure size_t abuse
>
> Backports the relevant bits from r1227856
>
> Modified:
> httpd/httpd/branch
On Friday 06 January 2012, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> Reading the declaration of
>
> AP_DECLARE(void *) ap_realloc(void *ptr, size_t size)
> ap_func_attr_warn_unused_result;
>
> macros are to be uppercase by our style guide. (Appears in trunk
> only)
True. But is
Hi Gregg,
On Sunday 15 January 2012, Gregg L. Smith wrote:
> > Build at r1226558, post both these revisions.
> > Missing main log directory shows up on console if started from
> > there, or Eventlog (syslog) if started as service
> > c:\Apache24\bin>httpd
> > (OS 2)The system cannot find the file
On Thursday 12 January 2012, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> On monday (Jan 16th), I plan to T&R 2.4.0...
+1
On Monday 16 January 2012, Tim Bannister wrote:
> On 16 Jan 2012, at 17:50, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> > The 2.4.0 (prerelease) tarballs are available for download and
test:
> > http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
> >
> > I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.0 GA.
> >
> > Vote
On Tuesday 17 January 2012, Graham Leggett wrote:
> # verifying that logged content is 256 characters
> ok 51
> # posted content (length 1024) to bogus-perl.pl
> # got return code of: 500, expecting: 500
> ok 52
> # verifying log did not increase in size...
> ok 53
> # verifying log is greater than
On Tuesday 17 January 2012, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> I'd suggest that patches/apply_to_x.y.z/ is a clumsy notation. It
> seems more efficient to set these up as patches/CVE--/
> with individual files for actively (or semi-actively) maintained
> versions. If there is one patch which ap
On Tuesday 17 January 2012, Graham Leggett wrote:
> %response
> perl cgi r.uri = "/modules/lua/hello.lua"
> return apache2.DECLINED
> end
> return apache2.DECLINED
> end
>
> function translate_name2(r)
> r:debug("translate_name2: " .. r.uri)
> local query = r:parseargs()
On Tuesday 17 January 2012, Steffen wrote:
> Please expand the time for the vote.
> So we can have the time for testing at last, like the nix flavors
> (red hat etc.)
FWIW, I agree with Steffen that a vote for the initial 2.4 GA release
should be longer. Maybe until next Monday?
On Tuesday 17 January 2012, Mario Brandt wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 16:53, Jim Jagielski
wrote:
> > If I had access to Windows I would. I don't.
>
> I can give you accces to a win2k8 32 bit box, if you need to have
> access.
Thanks for the offer, but the problem is also that most Unix
de
Hi Steffen,
On Tuesday 17 January 2012, Steffen wrote:
> Win boxes is not so the issue. More the lack of win dev's. We are
> leaning very much on Bill only, without him it should be
> dramatic.
I agree.
> At Aachelounge quite some users testing it by using it in real
> live. Special companies a
On Tuesday 17 January 2012, Graham Leggett wrote:
> On 17 Jan 2012, at 11:52 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> > This doesn't look right. It should look like this:
> >
> > %response
> > perl cgiType
> > '
> >
> > Do you have some lua magic con
On Friday 20 January 2012, Joe Orton wrote:
> The main loop in the core output filter (rewritten since 2.2) will
> try to read the entire passed-in brigade into RAM for
> CGI/PIPE-like mutating bucket types. :( :( We have trying to bash
> this kind of bug since 2.0.x days, and now the *core output
701 - 800 of 941 matches
Mail list logo
