Re: mod_tls as experimental module?

2021-11-24 Thread Jim Jagielski
Add it in :-) > On Nov 24, 2021, at 4:46 AM, ste...@eissing.org wrote: > > Coming back to this. Since there was no feedback on my post: are people > just too occupied/opposed/not interested? > > Curious, > Stefan > >> Am 18.11.2021 um 18:48 schrieb ste...@eissing.org: >> >> How would you feel

Re: reporting the bytes read and transferred to the worker from the tunnel

2021-05-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
LGTM > On May 5, 2021, at 5:59 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote: > > Hi, > > I have noted that when using websocket the bytes read and transfered by the > worker when using the tunnel are not taken in account. > > I have a patch attached, for comments ;-) > > Any better ideas how to fix that?

Apachecon

2021-03-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
Anyone submitting any httpd related proposals for AC2021?

Xcode 12

2020-10-29 Thread Jim Jagielski
Anyone hacking away on httpd and/or APR w/ Xcode 12? On my system at least it is throwing errors about -Werror,-Wimplicit-function-declaration, and not enabling IPv6: checking if APR supports IPv6... no -- no working getaddrinfo also likely due to an error when compiling because of

Warning: Xcode12 breaks apr* and httpd

2020-09-18 Thread Jim Jagielski
The upgrade from Xcode11 -> Xcode12 has been reported to break builds for APR and httpd... Issues seem to be some sort of forced C99 compliance and not discovering IPv6 capability. I'm not upgrading anytime soon so no idea how bad it is.

Re: Changing the httpd security process

2020-08-17 Thread Jim Jagielski
++1. I was never quite happy with this process, but it seemed like there was a lot of support for this kind of treatment. > On Aug 17, 2020, at 7:08 AM, Joe Orton wrote: > > > This roughly reverts the httpd process to what we used prior to adopting > the Tomcat-esque policy for the whole

Re: Pending fixes or reroll? Was: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.45

2020-07-31 Thread Jim Jagielski
+1 > On Jul 31, 2020, at 9:41 AM, Eric Covener wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 9:37 AM Rainer Jung wrote: >> >> Since there wasn't yet any reaction to Daniel's question: Is anybody >> right now working on more warnings fixes for Windows? >> > > Not me. I don't think we should wait on

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.45

2020-07-30 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Jul 30, 2020, at 5:55 AM, Christophe JAILLET > wrote: > > I wouldn't say it is a show stopper, but I thought that we had a travis job > for that. > Apparently, it is on trunk only (see r1879370 which is not backported, maybe > on purpose) > I agree that it's not a show-stopper but

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.44

2020-07-29 Thread Jim Jagielski
I'll hold off testing and voting until we hear from the RM on whether this release is DOA or not... > On Jul 29, 2020, at 8:02 AM, Stefan Eissing > wrote: > > -1. > > I have to apologise. I missed an important change in HTTP/2 that I like to > get in the release. This is about removing

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T late this week

2020-07-23 Thread Jim Jagielski
Sure. Go ahead. +1 > On Jul 22, 2020, at 7:32 PM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: > > Hi, all; > It's been a while since we've rolled a release and gotten fixes/etc in our > community's hands. Apologies for not suggesting this sooner. How about a T > Friday? That will let vote run through the weekend.

Re: svn commit: r1879285 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk: CHANGES docs/manual/mod/core.xml include/ap_mmn.h include/http_core.h include/http_protocol.h include/httpd.h modules/dav/fs/repos.c modules/test/mod_

2020-07-01 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Jun 29, 2020, at 10:27 AM, Graham Leggett wrote: > > On 29 Jun 2020, at 14:49, Yann Ylavic > wrote: > >>> Yes we can and should (but in separate commits). >>> >>> I have my eye on the r->proxyreq flag, we can pack this into the binary >>> notes too, values

Re: RFC: Documenting changes in the CHANGES file

2020-06-01 Thread Jim Jagielski
Works for me. > On May 29, 2020, at 3:30 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: > > Reviewing our backport process I noticed that in many cases a clean merge via > svn merge fails due to conflicts in CHANGES. While > these are easy to solve it puts IMHO unnecessary extra work on the backport > process,

Re: Building from svn on MacOS

2020-04-15 Thread Jim Jagielski
I always have svn co of apr and apr-util in srclib when I build from SVN

Re: svn commit: r1876511 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/core/mod_watchdog.c

2020-04-15 Thread Jim Jagielski
very, very elegant. > On Apr 14, 2020, at 8:37 AM, jor...@apache.org wrote: > > Author: jorton > Date: Tue Apr 14 12:37:17 2020 > New Revision: 1876511 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1876511=rev > Log: > * modules/core/mod_watchdog.c: Switch to simpler logic to avoid the > thread

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.43

2020-03-27 Thread Jim Jagielski
+1: o macOS 10.14.6, Xcode 11.3.1 (Event MPM): No regressions - Perl test framework o CentOS 6.10, 64bit (Event and Worker MPM): No regressions - Perl test framework o CentOS 7.7, 64bit (Event and Worker MPM): No regressions - Perl test framework > On Mar 26, 2020, at 10:50 AM, Daniel

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.42

2020-03-23 Thread Jim Jagielski
Based on this, I change my vote to -1 > On Mar 19, 2020, at 11:19 AM, Eric Covener wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 10:45 AM Daniel Ruggeri > wrote: >> >> Hi, all; >>Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures: >>

Re: async filters still borked (was Re: svn commit: r1874775 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/test/README.travis)

2020-03-20 Thread Jim Jagielski
+1 from me. > On Mar 20, 2020, at 9:46 AM, Joe Orton wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 06, 2020 at 09:30:41AM +0100, Ruediger Pluem wrote: >> On 3/4/20 9:23 AM, jor...@apache.org wrote: >>> Author: jorton >>> Date: Wed Mar 4 08:23:55 2020 >>> New Revision: 1874775 >>> >>> URL:

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.42

2020-03-20 Thread Jim Jagielski
+1: macOS 10.14.6, Xcode 11.3.1: No regressions - Perl test framework Will try to test on CentOS 6-8 today > On Mar 19, 2020, at 10:45 AM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: > > Hi, all; > Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/ > >

Netcraft

2020-02-21 Thread Jim Jagielski
Wow. Was Netcraft actually somewhat kind to Apache httpd? They actually admitted some areas where httpd is doing better, and still does better, market-share wise, than nginx.

Re: Add an entry in CHANGES file for Travis CI testing

2020-02-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
++1 > On Feb 11, 2020, at 12:43 PM, Mike Rumph wrote: > > With the talk of releasing 2.4.42, I was thinking that it might be a good > idea to add some mention of the Travis CI testing that was added in this > release. > Perhaps something in the CHANGES file that gives a summary of the results

Time for 2.4.42?

2020-02-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
Seems like a good time to propose a release... I can RM if desired.

Your Apache HTTPD story

2020-01-22 Thread Jim Jagielski
The CFP (Call For Papers) for ApacheCon NA 2020 is now open, and one major topic will be regarding the one project that started it all: Apache httpd. I am coordinating the Apache httpd track, and I am encouraging not only developers but more importantly USERS of the Apache web server to submit

Re: Time for httpd 2.6.x?

2019-11-03 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Nov 1, 2019, at 11:59 AM, Luca Toscano wrote: > > Il giorno mar 29 ott 2019 alle ore 18:31 Graham Leggett > mailto:minf...@sharp.fm>> ha scritto: >> >> On 29 Oct 2019, at 15:51, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >>> My only question regards workf

Re: Time for httpd 2.6.x?

2019-10-29 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Oct 29, 2019, at 9:36 AM, Eric Covener wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 9:18 AM Luca Toscano > wrote: >> >> Hi everybody, >> >> Il giorno ven 25 ott 2019 alle ore 12:52 Yann Ylavic >> ha scritto: >>> >>> So how about: >>> 0. github workflow?

Re: svn commit: r1860166 - in /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x: ./ docs/manual/mod/ include/ modules/http2/ modules/proxy/ server/

2019-10-29 Thread Jim Jagielski
Yikes! How can we test for that via the Perl test framework? > On Oct 29, 2019, at 9:45 AM, Rainer Jung wrote: > > Aha, and this is due to the fact, that r1656259 "mod_proxy_http: don't > connect or reuse backend before prefetching request body." or parts of it was > backported from trunk to

Re: Time for httpd 2.6.x?

2019-10-25 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Oct 25, 2019, at 6:59 AM, Graham Leggett wrote: > > On 24 Oct 2019, at 14:14, Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> Going from 2.4.x to 2.6.x implies an ABI break... Up to now, all backports >> from trunk have maintained the 2.4.x ABI backwards compatibility. >> &g

Re: Time for httpd 2.6.x?

2019-10-24 Thread Jim Jagielski
Going from 2.4.x to 2.6.x implies an ABI break... Up to now, all backports from trunk have maintained the 2.4.x ABI backwards compatibility. So I would propose that if we do the below, which I am fine w/ BTW, that the 1st issues we tackle after branching 2.6.x from httpd-24 are all the ABI

Re: svn commit: r1868456 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS

2019-10-14 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Oct 14, 2019, at 3:14 PM, jaillet...@apache.org wrote: > > Author: jailletc36 > Date: Mon Oct 14 19:14:04 2019 > New Revision: 1868456 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1868456=rev > Log: > Add a note > > Modified: >httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS > > Modified:

Re: httpd 2.4 and maintainer-mode

2019-10-14 Thread Jim Jagielski
Yeah, this seems clang specific... > On Oct 14, 2019, at 2:48 PM, Marion & Christophe JAILLET > wrote: > > > Le 14/10/2019 à 17:15, Jim Jagielski a écrit : >> >>> On Oct 10, 2019, at 2:49 PM, Marion & Christophe JAILLET >>> wrote: >

Re: httpd 2.4 and maintainer-mode

2019-10-14 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Oct 10, 2019, at 2:49 PM, Marion & Christophe JAILLET > wrote: > > I guess that my version of GCC (i.e. 8.3.0) tolerates some c89 deviation in > .h files included from "outside". > So you aren't using Xcode and clang?

Re: httpd 2.4 and maintainer-mode

2019-10-10 Thread Jim Jagielski
> - Stefan > >> Am 10.10.2019 um 14:10 schrieb Jim Jagielski : >> >> I am using MacPorts libxml2. But the issue seems to be w/ libxml2 itself; it >> is the package that uses the '//' comment style. Where does your build grab >> its xml2 stuff from? >> >

Re: httpd 2.4 and maintainer-mode

2019-10-10 Thread Jim Jagielski
as mentioned, this is httpd-2.4... I was curious why I seem to be the only one whom this hits. > On Oct 10, 2019, at 9:43 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 3:42 PM Jim Jagielski <mailto:j...@jagunet.com>> wrote: > Just the issues w/ libxml comments:

Re: httpd 2.4 and maintainer-mode

2019-10-10 Thread Jim Jagielski
/ make, and there is nothing >> special. >> >> Any specific issue? >> >> CJ >> >> >> Le 09/10/2019 à 15:33, Jim Jagielski a écrit : >>> Anyone else trying to build HEAD of httpd-2.4 with --enable-maintainer-mode? >>> >

Re: httpd 2.4 and maintainer-mode

2019-10-09 Thread Jim Jagielski
cific issue? > > CJ > > > Le 09/10/2019 à 15:33, Jim Jagielski a écrit : >> Anyone else trying to build HEAD of httpd-2.4 with --enable-maintainer-mode? >>

httpd 2.4 and maintainer-mode

2019-10-09 Thread Jim Jagielski
Anyone else trying to build HEAD of httpd-2.4 with --enable-maintainer-mode?

ACNA20 and Apache https's 25th anniversary

2019-10-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
Next year will be httpd's 25th anniversary. I think it would be great if the web server PMC would commit to having a httpd track at ACNA20... Anyone else interested? We'd need about 6-7 talks to fill the track.

Migrate to git?

2019-10-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
Various PMCs have made their default/de-facto SCM git and have seen an increase in contributions and contributors... Is this something the httpd project should consider? Especially w/ the foundation officially supporting Github, it seems like time to have a discussion about it, especially as

Problem w/ Revision 1864435

2019-09-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
This breaks building on macOS: Making all in filters /Users/jim/src/asf/code/dev/httpd-trunk/srclib/apr/libtool --silent --mode=link gcc -I/usr/local/include/libxml2 -I/usr/local/include -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations -std=c89 -Werror -Wall

Suggestions

2019-09-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
Any suggestions or recommendation for features, capabilities, etc that I should make sure to include in my Apache httpd 2.4 overview preso at ACNA19 next week (or my reverse proxy one)?? Cheers!

Re: [PATCH 63503] - Reverse proxy server - SIGSEGV

2019-08-12 Thread Jim Jagielski
Via inspection this looks quite sane. > On Aug 12, 2019, at 3:24 PM, Eric Covener wrote: > > Hi Don, can you try this very similar patch? I applied yours to my > sandbox to get more context and made a few minor changes (including > pre-existing stuff that looked misleading) > >

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.41

2019-08-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
Tested: o macOS 10.14.6, Xcode 10.3 (64bit) o CentOS 5, 6 (64bit) o Ubuntu 14.04 LTS (64bit) All +1: no regressions. Thanks for RMing! > On Aug 9, 2019, at 9:40 AM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: > > Hi, all; > Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures: >

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.40

2019-08-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
I vote -1 due to the known issue w/ building and running mod_md. Yes, it's not a regression, but the fix is easy and version numbers are cheap. We should release the best possible version each time. Let's mark 2.4.40 DOA and release 2.4.41 w/ the patch. > On Aug 3, 2019, at 9:51 AM, Daniel

Re: release?

2019-07-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
ted, but if you > would prefer to, it's all yours, Jim :-) > I wouldn't mind giving it a spin... might be a good way to get a wider UX on the scripting. > Happy weekend! > -- > Daniel Ruggeri > > On July 19, 2019 6:34:10 AM CDT, Jim Jagielski wrote: > +1. If Daniel do

Re: release?

2019-07-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
+1. If Daniel doesn't have the time, I can. > On Jul 18, 2019, at 10:06 AM, Stefan Eissing > wrote: > > It would be great if we could make a release this month. There are several > fixes and improvements already backported and a few outstanding issues that > need a vote or two. > > Please

Re: Arranging mod_proxy_balancer to make it provider of balancer/worker.

2019-05-15 Thread Jim Jagielski
Go for it! > On May 14, 2019, at 3:40 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote: > > Hi, > > I would like to be able to add worker/balancer from another module > (mod_proxy_cluster) basically using a part of balancer_handler() to make > a provider (like insert_update_worker(params)), any objections or >

Re: ApacheCon call for presentations, httpd content

2019-05-09 Thread Jim Jagielski
I can always do my "httpd 2.4 overview" as well as my "httpd 2.4 reverse proxy" talk. > On May 2, 2019, at 10:39 AM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: > > Hi, Rich; > I was looking at the CFP and didn't quite see something that aligns with > httpd. These are the categories allowed: > General >

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.39

2019-03-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
My own.. Cheers! > On Mar 28, 2019, at 10:00 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group > wrote: > > What pcre lib did you use on CentOS5? The one provided by CentOS or your own? > > Regards > > Rüdiger > > > C2 General > Von: Jim Jagielski > Ge

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.39

2019-03-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
> > C2 General > >> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- >> Von: Jim Jagielski >> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 28. März 2019 13:39 >> An: httpd >> Betreff: Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.39 >> >> >>> On Mar 27, 2019, at 11:09 AM, Daniel Ruggeri >

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.39

2019-03-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Mar 27, 2019, at 11:09 AM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: > > Hi, all; > Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/ > > I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release this candidate > tarball as 2.4.39: > [ ]

Re: http://svn.apache.org/r1850745

2019-03-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Mar 13, 2019, at 11:04 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > > As you can see, you didn't modify only modules/filters/ ... Maybe you > meant to modify MOD_CPPFLAGS, as modules/http2/modules.mak does? > If that will solve the issue I'm all for it! Thx.

Re: http://svn.apache.org/r1850745

2019-03-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Mar 13, 2019, at 8:51 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 1:45 PM Eric Covener wrote: >> >> On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 8:43 AM Jim Jagielski wrote: >>> >>> Is there anyone else building 2.4 on macOS under maintainer-mode >

Re: http://svn.apache.org/r1850745

2019-03-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
It's libxml2 from MacPorts... which is basically vanilla libxml2. APR is 1.6.x > On Mar 13, 2019, at 8:56 AM, Nick Kew wrote: > > > >> On 13 Mar 2019, at 12:43, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >> Is there anyone else building 2.4 on macOS under maintainer-mode

http://svn.apache.org/r1850745

2019-03-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
Is there anyone else building 2.4 on macOS under maintainer-mode who is also being affected by the above? The fact that I seem to be the anyone "complaining" :) seems weird... Thx!

Re: lmdb, load-balancing, Sharing data about worker nodes among processes and threads in httpd

2019-02-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
One of the reasons we use mod_slotmem for load-balancing is that it allows for other storage mechanisms to be used rather than shared memory... mod_slotmem uses the httpd provider mechanism to extend the underlying implementation. As such, we could use LMDB, Geode, as our shared storage. > On

Re: http workshop

2019-01-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
i could present > On Jan 28, 2019, at 10:21 AM, Stefan Eissing > wrote: > > The HTTP Workshop is returning 2019 on April 2-4 in Amsterdam > (https://github.com/httpworkshop/workshop2019). While I attended the last > three shops(?), I think it would be a good opportunity for someone else from

Re: Latest test builds

2019-01-20 Thread Jim Jagielski
sorry wrong list > On Jan 19, 2019, at 8:16 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > I've uploaded the latest test builds for macOS and Linux 64. > These are based on ~r1851640 and include 2 main updates from > the earlier one: > > o beanshell now included > o macOS path bu

Latest test builds

2019-01-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
I've uploaded the latest test builds for macOS and Linux 64. These are based on ~r1851640 and include 2 main updates from the earlier one: o beanshell now included o macOS path bug should now be squashed (https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127965) Let me know if anyone wants me to

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.38

2019-01-18 Thread Jim Jagielski
+1: Tested on: o macOS 10.14.2, Xcode 10.1 o CentOS7 Will do more testing today but so far, so good. Thx for RMing! > On Jan 17, 2019, at 1:49 PM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: > > Hi, all; > Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures: >

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.28

2019-01-17 Thread Jim Jagielski
Ahhh good. > On Jan 17, 2019, at 12:46 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 6:44 PM Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >> Note that simply changing the commit msg logs does not solve the problem. >> There is, >> in fact, no 2.4.38 tag at all. And I'

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.28

2019-01-17 Thread Jim Jagielski
Note that simply changing the commit msg logs does not solve the problem. There is, in fact, no 2.4.38 tag at all. And I'm guessing we destroyed the "real" 2.4.28 tag... :(

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.28

2019-01-17 Thread Jim Jagielski
Shouldn't this be 2.4.38?? > On Jan 17, 2019, at 12:13 PM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: > > Hi, all; > Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/ > > I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release this candidate >

Re: svn commit: r1851549 - /httpd/httpd/tags/2.4.28/2.4.x/

2019-01-17 Thread Jim Jagielski
2.4.28? > On Jan 17, 2019, at 12:08 PM, drugg...@apache.org wrote: > > Author: druggeri > Date: Thu Jan 17 17:08:22 2019 > New Revision: 1851549 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1851549=rev > Log: > Tag HEAD of 2.4.x as 2.4.28 > > Added: >httpd/httpd/tags/2.4.28/2.4.x/ (props

Re: svn commit: r1850745 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/filters/config.m4

2019-01-16 Thread Jim Jagielski
I specifically didn't use #pragma GCC diagnostic push in order to avoid this exact kind of discussion... > On Jan 16, 2019, at 4:46 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > I'm sorry but I'm confused. The patch is as specific as you can get. It just > adds the minimal option and JUST for filt

Re: svn commit: r1850745 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/filters/config.m4

2019-01-16 Thread Jim Jagielski
d/httpd/trunk/modules/filters/config.m4 > > > > > > > > > Am 16.01.2019 um 03:33 schrieb William A Rowe Jr > clan.net <http://clan.net/>>: > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 8:37 AM Jim Jagielski > > <mailto:j...@jagunet.com>

Re: svn commit: r1850745 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/filters/config.m4

2019-01-15 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Jan 15, 2019, at 9:21 AM, Eric Covener wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 9:14 AM Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >> >> >> On Jan 9, 2019, at 7:41 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: >> >> Hi Jim, >> >> Does CFLAGS -std=c99 solve your iss

Re: [NOTICE] Intent to T 2.4.28

2019-01-15 Thread Jim Jagielski
Could I please get one more vote on adding in mod_socache_redis from trunk... It's been waiting for several releases by now. > On Jan 15, 2019, at 7:27 AM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: > > Hi, all; > It's been a while since we've rolled a release and we've had some recent > movement, so I'd like to

Re: svn commit: r1850745 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/filters/config.m4

2019-01-15 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Jan 9, 2019, at 7:41 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > Does CFLAGS -std=c99 solve your issue? It seems to work here. I'm building on > the Fedora 29, largely frozen end-of-july. Reverting the patch below and > toggling -std=c89 to -std=c99 in configure.in

Re: [PATCH] fix test/mod_dialup.c for non-threaded APR

2019-01-08 Thread Jim Jagielski
+1 by me. > On Jan 8, 2019, at 7:09 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote: > > See https://svn.apache.org/r1663375 for a related fix by covener. > Which, by the way, should probably be backported to 2.4; I see a failure > on a buildbot which deliberately builds with non-threaded APR to ensure > that this

Jim's been busy

2018-12-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
I've been slammed both at work and personal and haven't had time to do much httpd stuff... just a FYI in case people were curious. Should free up by the end of the month.

Re: Plan to add sandbox branch

2018-11-30 Thread Jim Jagielski
Hmmm... this has me thinking about maybe using the provider interface to implement the communication mechanism... let me mull this over. > On Nov 30, 2018, at 8:27 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > Yeah, I looked for something else, esp various pubsub implementations, but > they reall

Re: Plan to add sandbox branch

2018-11-30 Thread Jim Jagielski
Yeah, I looked for something else, esp various pubsub implementations, but they really didn't fit in with what was needed. > On Nov 29, 2018, at 3:02 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote: > > On 29/11/2018 07:02, Christophe JAILLET wrote: >> Le 28/11/2018 à 02:33, Daniel Ruggeri a écrit : >>> Hi,

Re: Plan to add sandbox branch

2018-11-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
n between httpd and the backends, we could add something like a CONFIG survey that allows for the backends to "suggest" params. > -- > Daniel Ruggeri > > On November 27, 2018 5:23:25 AM CST, Jim Jagielski wrote: > In the coming week or so, I will be committing my load bal

Plan to add sandbox branch

2018-11-27 Thread Jim Jagielski
In the coming week or so, I will be committing my load balance, load determination and discovery work to a sandbox trunk. Many people have asked for more info, so here we go. Basically, this new feature uses nanomsg (nng) to implement the SURVEY protocol between workers (nodes) and the front end

Re: 2.4.38

2018-11-09 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Nov 9, 2018, at 2:54 PM, Graham Leggett wrote: > > On 09 Nov 2018, at 17:51, Stefan Eissing wrote: > >> So, the chance is high that releases we do will work for most of you. >> AND the chance is high that releases might break something for some of you >> (hopefully a few). > > The

Re: Load balancing and load determination

2018-11-08 Thread Jim Jagielski
I have a semi-working implementation that I'll be committing to trunk in a bit... > On Nov 8, 2018, at 1:33 AM, Mladen Turk wrote: > > On 30.10.2018. 13:53, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> As some of you know, one of my passions and area of focus is >> on the use of Apache htt

2.4.38

2018-11-07 Thread Jim Jagielski
Now that we have a 2.4.37 out, one in which the number of enhancements and fixes and feature were limited, it makes sense to consider having a 2.4.38 release somewhat "soonish", esp considering the number of backports that lack only a single vote. Comments?

Re: Load balancing and load determination

2018-11-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
Which is why we allow for both pre-send checks and out-of-band health checks... > On Nov 5, 2018, at 10:58 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > > The last thing we want are the routing headaches of contacting an > ever-changing list one-or-many potential balancers. And we can't > rely on a dying

Re: Load balancing and load determination

2018-11-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
I was thinking about something more robust and usable than heartbeat (due to multicast) but similar in basic concept. > On Nov 5, 2018, at 8:48 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote: > > On 30/10/2018 13:53, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> As some of you know, one of my passions an

Re: __attribute__

2018-11-02 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Nov 1, 2018, at 5:53 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 3:31 PM Jim Jagielski <mailto:j...@jagunet.com>> wrote: > Since __attribute__ is used in various places in trunk and 2.4, is it safe to > assume that I can write something that requi

__attribute__

2018-11-01 Thread Jim Jagielski
Since __attribute__ is used in various places in trunk and 2.4, is it safe to assume that I can write something that requires __attribute__(packed)?

Re: Load balancing and load determination

2018-10-30 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Oct 30, 2018, at 9:06 AM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: > > Hi, Jim J; > I recall a while back that Jim Riggs proposed a spec for exactly this a while > back... I think it was shared here on list and some light iteration was done. > IIUC, he was even planning to present it at ACNA until travel

Re: Load balancing and load determination

2018-10-30 Thread Jim Jagielski
m. I think this is roughly the same you are > suggesting, Jim J, but I struggle to think of a universal benchmark because > backends are so varied. > -- > Daniel Ruggeri > > On October 30, 2018 7:53:20 AM CDT, Jim Jagielski wrote: > As some of you know, one of my passions and are

Load balancing and load determination

2018-10-30 Thread Jim Jagielski
As some of you know, one of my passions and area of focus is on the use of Apache httpd as a reverse proxy and, as such, load balancing, failover, etc are of vital interest to me. One topic which I have mulling over, off and on, has been the idea of some sort of universal load number, that could

Re: SetHandler balancer-manager question.

2018-10-23 Thread Jim Jagielski
Yes, it is normal and expected behavior, but one can say that such behavior isn't "correct" or "should be changed", esp now that we can add members dynamically. So I would be +1 on changing the code to show all balancers, regardless of whether they have workers/members or not. > On Oct 23,

Re: Test framework regressions - spelling and usertrack

2018-10-22 Thread Jim Jagielski
Well, we'll see if other macOS users also have the same failures... that will determine if my hypothesis is correct. > On Oct 22, 2018, at 11:37 AM, Stefan Eissing > wrote: > > dAMn! uSABilitY StRiks aGAIn! > >> Am 22.10.2018 um 17:34 schrieb Jim Jagielski : >>

Re: Test framework regressions - spelling and usertrack

2018-10-22 Thread Jim Jagielski
OK, I think I know what may be happening; I am guessing its due to the macOS file system being case insensitive but case preserving...

Re: Test framework regressions - spelling and usertrack

2018-10-22 Thread Jim Jagielski
The latest update to usertrack works. Thx! speling still bad: On httpd-2.4 HEAD: t/modules/speling.t . 1/48 # Failed test 11 in t/modules/speling.t at line 46 fail #6 # Failed test 12 in t/modules/speling.t at line 50 fail #5 # Failed test 35 in t/modules/speling.t at line

Test framework regressions - spelling and usertrack

2018-10-22 Thread Jim Jagielski
These are new from a coupla day ago: t/modules/speling.t . 1/48 # Failed test 11 in t/modules/speling.t at line 46 fail #6 # Failed test 12 in t/modules/speling.t at line 50 fail #5 # Failed test 35 in t/modules/speling.t at line 46 fail #18 # Failed test 36 in

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.37

2018-10-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
+1: o macOS 10.13.6, Xcode 10, OpenSSL 1.1.1 and 1.0.2p o CentOS 5&6, OpenSSL 1.0.2, 64bit Thx for RMing! > On Oct 18, 2018, at 10:36 AM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: > > Hi, all; > Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/ >

Re: svn commit: r1843478 - /httpd/test/framework/trunk/t/ssl/ocsp.t

2018-10-18 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Oct 16, 2018, at 11:36 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > To button this issue up, it's clear to me that Jim had transposed the meaning > of result values from posix commands, and that was the origin of > irrationality in this discussion. > Actually, I did not. But thanks for playing.

Re: svn commit: r1843478 - /httpd/test/framework/trunk/t/ssl/ocsp.t

2018-10-15 Thread Jim Jagielski
Forget this. My patch works and is correct and handles the specific situation which is noted in the test case itself related to older versions. It is an IMPROVEMENT over what we currently have. The sole reason why Bill doesn't like it is because *I* committed it. Whatever. I have no desire or

Re: svn commit: r1843478 - /httpd/test/framework/trunk/t/ssl/ocsp.t

2018-10-15 Thread Jim Jagielski
-1 (veto). 'list' is not a valid command. > On Oct 15, 2018, at 11:04 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 7:52 AM Jim Jagielski <mailto:j...@jagunet.com>> wrote: > > And lest we forget, the orig version used: > > $openssl list -com

Re: svn commit: r1843917 - /httpd/test/framework/trunk/t/ssl/ocsp.t

2018-10-15 Thread Jim Jagielski
-1 (veto) Please revert. 'list' is NOT a command and this causes OCSP to be skipped. % openssl version OpenSSL 1.0.2p 14 Aug 2018 % openssl list -commands openssl:Error: 'list' is an invalid command. Standard commands asn1parse caciphers cms crl

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.36

2018-10-15 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Oct 15, 2018, at 10:20 AM, Stefan Eissing > wrote: > > > >> Am 15.10.2018 um 16:11 schrieb Jim Jagielski : >> >> It's up to the RM on whether or not to release... one can't veto a release >> and a -1 is not a veto. > > Huh? I was referri

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.36

2018-10-15 Thread Jim Jagielski
It's up to the RM on whether or not to release... one can't veto a release and a -1 is not a veto. > On Oct 15, 2018, at 10:07 AM, Stefan Eissing > wrote: > > > >> Am 15.10.2018 um 15:58 schrieb Jim Jagielski : >> >> Considering all this, I am chan

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.36

2018-10-15 Thread Jim Jagielski
Considering all this, I am changing my vote from a +1 to a -1. I was not able to trigger this error, but this shows, at least IMO, that TLS 1.3 support isn't quite yet tested enough to warrant a public release, unless we are super clear that it is "experimental" or "early access"... > On Oct

Re: svn commit: r1843478 - /httpd/test/framework/trunk/t/ssl/ocsp.t

2018-10-15 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Oct 14, 2018, at 3:59 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > $ openssl xyz >/dev/null > Invalid command 'xyz'; type "help" for a list. > $ echo $? > 1 > $ openssl version > OpenSSL 1.1.0i-fips 14 Aug 2018 > > I have no idea which bastardization of the openssl command line tool you are >

Re: svn commit: r1843478 - /httpd/test/framework/trunk/t/ssl/ocsp.t

2018-10-14 Thread Jim Jagielski
All we are checking is the error code. Nothing else. % openssl version OpenSSL 1.0.2p 14 Aug 2018 % openssl ocsp 2>/dev/null % print $? 1 % openssl foo 2>/dev/null % print $? 0 With 1.1.1, both return 1, but so what, we know that it has oscp. Complaining about /dev/null

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.36

2018-10-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
Oh, and it's not a regression since, at least, 2.4.34 (at least for me) > On Oct 11, 2018, at 7:35 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > FWIW, on macOS, both trunk and httpd-2.4 fail on this test: > > t/modules/buffer.t .. 3/12 # Failed test 4 in > t/modules/buffer

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.36

2018-10-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
FWIW, on macOS, both trunk and httpd-2.4 fail on this test: t/modules/buffer.t .. 3/12 # Failed test 4 in t/modules/buffer.t at line 32 t/modules/buffer.t .. 7/12 # Failed test 8 in t/modules/buffer.t at line 32 fail #2 t/modules/buffer.t ..

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >