At 12:11 PM 3/24/2007, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
I don't want to propose a bunch of tiny changes like this,
but I'm looking towards a possible review of mod_dav.
Meanwhile, anyone BTDT and have insights to share?
What is BTDT? -- justin
Been There, Done That
At 08:33 AM 2/14/2007, Garrett Rooney wrote:
On 2/14/07, Paul Querna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This proposed list of requirements for a 3.0 platform. this list
enables
a 'base' level of performance and design decisions to be made. If
others
can make designs work with 'lessor' requirements, al
At 07:56 AM 11/2/2006, Ivan Ristic wrote:
BTW, what's a "round tuit"? :)
It's a play on words:
"I'll do it when I get around to it" -> "I'll do it when I get a
round tuit"
If you don't have enough round tuits, you don't have the time to do
something.
At 01:41 PM 10/27/2006, Davi Arnaut wrote:
Niklas Edmundsson wrote:
> And when you have a file backend, you want to hit your disk cache
and
> not the backend when delivering data to a client. People might
think
> that this doesn't matter, but for large files, especially larger
than
> RAM in yo
At 10:39 AM 3/20/2006, Sander Temme wrote:
On Mar 20, 2006, at 12:26 AM, Graham Leggett wrote:
Sander Temme wrote:
What do you, the httpd dev community, think of:
1) the concept?
This kind of thing is definitely overdue - tomcat has had this for
ages.
2) the attached implementation?
Tom
Prathama first wrote:
But my requirement is that I shouln't restart the apache web server
while
updating the certificates. As there are many other requests to other
virtual hosts are being processed.
Prathama then wrote:
But the requirement for my project itself is to be able to update
the co
At 12:52 PM 8/4/2005, Paul A Houle wrote:
(2) This particular system has a production and a test instance, so
I'd love to have a way to set variables that I can interpolate into
arbitrary strings. For instance, everything connected with the
production system may be under
This already exist
At 11:34 AM 7/1/2005, Rian A Hunter wrote:
Quoting Garrett Rooney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Rian Hunter wrote:
> > type misc_smtp_handler(request_rec *r) {
> > smtpd_request_rec *smtp_data;
> >
> > if (strncmp("http", r->protocol_name, 4)) {
> > // decline to handle, this module does
At 10:42 AM 6/17/2005, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Checkout date/time is generally the right choice for developers,
because otherwise make doesn't always pick up when a file has
changed. (I've been bit by the Visual SourceSafe "modification
time" default enough times.)
Although - heh - you a
At 12:01 PM 6/16/2005, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Back to httpd land; the question is --- is this the right choice for
*our tarballs*? Which may or may not be related to the question
above. In any case; this is useful metadata even for end users who
build the package for the reasons I mentio
At 11:23 AM 3/18/2005, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
I absolutely refuse to punish users who are using good OSes because
some OSes are brain-dead. This is exactly the role that APR is
meant to fill
Feel free to advocate Linux always returning APR_ENOTIMPL for
sendfile - I don't care. However, bloc
At 07:20 AM 9/23/2004, Mladen Turk wrote:
Is there any reason why apr, apr-util, httpd mailing lists have
Reply-To header set to the sender and not to the list itself. I
think almost all other lists has the 'Replay-To' header set to the
list itself. I mean, I'm receiving the messages from the li
At 06:53 PM 9/10/2004, Jean-Jacques Clar wrote:
I replaced the cleanup field with a bit set in refcount. This is
done to prevent race conditions when refcount is accessed on two
different threads/CPUS.
+#define OBJECT_CLEANUP_BIT 0x00F0
0x00F0 isn't a bit, it's 4 bits: 0x0010 | 0x00
At 10:50 PM 7/15/2004, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
I agree, here, with Joe. Wondering if it's an appropriate
alternative.
I'm facing similar, with a subproject entering incubation, and I'd
like to know our decision here, before I go and create a subproject
structure under /httpd/ that turns ou
At 12:33 PM 6/11/2004, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
The proper logic to add to a cache is
wrlock
test if exists again
add element
unlock
because there is a race condition in the logic below
rdlock
test if the element exists
>> race is here, prior to wrlocking, another thread may
wrlock->inser
At 10:18 PM 6/8/2004, Rici Lake wrote:
The patch is now posted to bugzilla as [Bug 29450]. I believe that
conforms to the patches.html document cited below. Although that
document says -C3 is acceptable, I have submitted it in the
preferential -u format (which I also prefer, actually).
It says u
At 01:33 PM 3/4/2004, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
At 12:04 PM 3/4/2004, Greg Marr wrote:
>At 12:00 PM 3/4/2004, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>>At 09:55 AM 3/4/2004, Greg Marr wrote:
>>
>>>/incremental:no is the default, and MSDev will at times remove
flags that it finds r
At 12:00 PM 3/4/2004, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
At 09:55 AM 3/4/2004, Greg Marr wrote:
>/incremental:no is the default, and MSDev will at times remove
flags that it finds redundant, even ones that it added
itself. It's a bit schizophrenic like that.
uh wrong. with /debug inc
At 09:09 AM 3/4/2004, Joe Orton wrote:
On Mon, Mar 01, 2004 at 05:49:52PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> ake 2004/03/01 09:49:52
>
> Modified:.libhttpd.dsp
> Log:
> add eoc_bucket.c to project
I'm not qualified to review Win32 changes but did you mean to remove
/increme
At 10:22 AM 2/5/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for the feedback, Will.
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
At 03:39 PM 2/4/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But then if I play devil's advocate, someone could see the new directive
and turn it on when it's not appropriate and cause Bad Things to
happ
c) and which as a whole should not
+ *be unlikely to be in use anywhere else.
"should not likely be in use" or "should be unlikely to be in use"
+If none if configured a sensible, but not particular
s/if/is/
s/particular/particularly/
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 18:45:25 -0700
"Paul Querna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 17:15:35 -0800, Roy T. Fielding wrote
> -1. I'm still of the mind that _every_ release should be
recreatable.
> Anything we put out there is going to be at least perceived as
> official,
> and we shou
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 16:21:04 -0500
Glenn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 04:12:20PM -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote:
I may be misunderstanding you... or do you mean just have
Apache 1.3 "APR aware" and not for 1.3 to *use* it per se,
but allow for modules to call APR... That would be
I found some time to look for existing discussions on this...
(should have done that earlier)... It isn't valid to send
Set-Cookie on a 304.
It is not valid to set a cookie in a 304 response. Please see
section 10.3.5 of RFC2616. That is the reason Apache explictly
lists headers that will be
- 'exp' is an apr_time_t, you mean 'exps' I guess?
mod_cache.c: In function `cache_in_filter':
mod_cache.c:543: warning: format argument is not a pointer (arg 3)
Oooh, yowtch... good call. I wasn't even looking at that part.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
the line
is so the linker knows how much space you've allocated for the
module. If it module is larger than that size, a warning will be
issued at link time.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 16 Oct 2002 19:24:22 -0400
Joshua Slive <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm +1 for creating 2.1 and 2.2 trees as proposed by Bill.
My one thought about this proposal is that it is unclear whether or
not this is attempting to emulate the Perl versioning scheme. If so,
then it's backwards,
t notices in their distribution areas
that some of the libraries they use aren't thread-safe, and that
until this is fixed, users should not use any of the threaded models
in Apache 2.0, and recommend use of the non-threaded models.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"We thought you were dead."
"I was, but I'm better now." - Sheridan, "The Summoning"
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/patches.html
Under "Submitting your patch", the first sentence still refers to the
old mailing list: "If you are a subscriber to new-httpd",
if (r->proxyreq == PROXY_PASS) {
>+const char *buf;
>+/* Add X-Forwarded-Host: so that upstream knows what the
>+ * original request hostname was.
>+ */
>+if ((buf - ap_table_get(r->headers_in, "Host"))) {
I think this shoul
On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 06:45:03PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> slive 02/05/23 11:45:02
...
> +Do not download from www.apache.org. Please use a mirror site
> + to help use save apache.org bandwidth.
should that be "help us save"?
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PRO
lds. We use it with in-IDE builds all the
time. If you're worried about it affecting other xcopy commands, set
the COPYCMD variable to /y, call xcopy, and then clear it again.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"We thought you were dead."
"I was, but I'm better now." - Sheridan, "The Summoning"
You can put the /y switch in the COPYCMD environment
variable. WinNT's xcopy ignores this, but Win2K's will pick it up.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"We thought you were dead."
"I was, but I'm better now." - Sheridan, "The Summoning"
he C-L filter can't verify the C-L, it should be
>removing it from the request. If it doesn't, that is the bug.
Isn't the filter that changes the content responsible for removing
the C-L? Otherwise, the C-L filter would either remove the C-L every
time, or have to buffer the entire thing.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"We thought you were dead."
"I was, but I'm better now." - Sheridan, "The Summoning"
> > put my public key in the KEYS file, but I'm a little clumsy with
> gpg.)
>
>If you key isn't already in the KEYS file, you can't release those
>binaries.
Uh, why not? As long as the key is in the KEYS file before the
binaries are posted, what difference do
I doubt it. The warning is about the '<', which occurs because
buf_size is size_t, and len is off_t.
BTW, I've never had any troubles with the result type of ?: on
Win32. It's always the result type of the true result, which is what
it should be, as far as I've seen.
l not be able to even load the module. The
LoadLibrary call will fail, since the module is linked against
functions that don't exist. That is a standard system error message
from using LoadLibrary to load a DLL when a required dependency
doesn't exist.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"We thought you were dead."
"I was, but I'm better now." - Sheridan, "The Summoning"
x27;t be trying to verify it.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"We thought you were dead."
"I was, but I'm better now." - Sheridan, "The Summoning"
At 03:53 PM 02/06/2002, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
>Greg Marr wrote:
> >
> > I read that last sentence as: "An issue becomes a showstopper when
> > it is listed as such in STATUS, and remains one until someone
> vetoes
> > it, at which time it is no lo
TATUS, and
remains one until someone vetoes it, at which time it is no longer a
showstopper. Thus, a consensus is required for an issue to be a
showstopper, and anyone can move something out of the showstopper
category at any time."
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"We thought you were dead."
"I was, but I'm better now." - Sheridan, "The Summoning"
ion requests for the same resource in the
>access log, with large numbers of them getting 500 instead of 200.
Shouldn't these be 503 Service Unavailable instead of just a plain 500?
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"We thought you were dead."
"I was, but I'm better now." - Sheridan, "The Summoning"
stdcall calling convention is used to call Win32 API functions.
The callee cleans the stack, so the compiler makes vararg functions
__cdecl.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"We thought you were dead."
"I was, but I'm better now." - Sheridan, "The Summoning"
ent it from loading in the first place, since it is
linked against a function that doesn't exist. The breaking of binary
compatibility in this case is at the link layer.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"We thought you were dead."
"I was, but I'm better now." - Sheridan, "The Summoning"
lined
>to remove it from the
>core and put it in its own repository for the same reasons I want to
>keep mod_gz out.
Why not just put them in modules/experimental? Isn't that what it's
for?
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"We thought you were dead."
"I was, but I'm better now." - Sheridan, "The Summoning"
$arg;
$val = eval "\$CFG_$val";
-$result .= eval qq("$val");
+$result .= eval qq("$val") if defined $val;
$result .= ";;";
$ok = 1;
}
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"We thought you were dead."
"I was, but I'm better now." - Sheridan, "The Summoning"
patch small, and keep
>the performance high for the standard HTTP methods, the old macros
>were kept. ... they are gauranteed to have the same value as the
>constant though.
Ah, I missed that part of it. Thanks.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"We thought you were dead."
"I was, but I'm better now." - Sheridan, "The Summoning"
uot;GET", "OPTIONS", "POST",
>NULL);
>+ap_allow_standard_methods(r, REPLACE_ALLOW, M_GET, M_OPTIONS,
>M_POST, -1);
Weren't these "method numbers" recently removed so that there are no
"standard" methods, and all the methods are added the
if the pages were ever to be marked as XHTML, they'd need to be
lowercase.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"We thought you were dead."
"I was, but I'm better now." - Sheridan, "The Summoning"
At 06:19 PM 09/03/2001, Graham Leggett wrote:
>Greg Marr wrote:
>
> > How exactly do you use Cache-Control directives so that the
> content that
> > is cached is before includes are processed, and that when it is
> > retrieved from the cache, the includes are pro
Graham Leggett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Greg Marr wrote:
>
> > In Ian's particular case, that is incorrect. The value of his
> > includes vary from request to request, so he needs the cache to
> > be before the includes filter.
>
> This isn&#
On Sat, 01 Sep 2001 14:47:55 +0200
Graham Leggett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bill Stoddard wrote:
>
> > Yep, you definitely need CACHE_OUT to be a CONTENT filter in this
> > case since INCLUDES is a CONTENT filter and you need INCLUDES to
> > be run after CACHE_OUT.
>
> I disagree - includes
51 matches
Mail list logo
