Whatever exists in the tarball is not really an issue, since
CHANGES is never really intended to be canon anyway.
However, if we are concerned about confusion, I would suggest that
we change the CHANGES_2.4 and CHANGES_2.4.12 files which are
more visible.
On Jan 28, 2015, at 6:10 PM, Eric
In Changes I miss the revert r1642852 ?
Steffen
-Original Message-
From: Jim Jagielski
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2015 7:34 PM Newsgroups: gmane.comp.apache.devel
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: [CLOSED] Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.12 as GA
The above VOTE is now CLOSED
Am 27.01.2015 um 21:41 schrieb William A. Rowe Jr.:
I'd agree. My thoughts on OP's posts, that their specific PHP scripts
are modifying the global timezone locale, notably process-by-process,
and these are not reset at the end of processing. In the case of the
event or worker MPM it's
On Wed, 28 Jan 2015 12:45:59 +0100
Steffen i...@apachelounge.com wrote:
In Changes I miss the revert r1642852 ?
It probably went unmentioned, because it appears to never hit CHANGES
in the first place (and 2.4.11 was not released), so the change had
never appeared to end users of released
Older releases are not not released releases. I was just assuming and to
be clear as possible for the end-users.
-Original Message-
From: Eric Covener
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 12:21 AM
To: Apache HTTP Server Development List
Subject: Re: [CLOSED] Re: [VOTE] Release Apache
Subject: Re: [CLOSED] Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.12 as GA
On Wed, 28 Jan 2015 23:16:06 +0100
Steffen i...@apachelounge.com wrote:
There was an issue with 2.4.11 and in 2.4.12 there is nothing
mentioned in the change file what is reverted. There must be in
2.4.11 a change which was causing
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 5:48 PM, Steffen i...@apachelounge.com wrote:
For users it can now be questionable if the 2.4.11 changes are included in
2.4.12
Can you articulate why? It seems to be business as usual, you don't
lose fixes in older releases.
Am 28.01.2015 um 23:01 schrieb William A. Rowe Jr.:
On Wed, 28 Jan 2015 12:02:32 +0100
Rainer Jung rainer.j...@kippdata.de wrote:
Am 27.01.2015 um 21:41 schrieb William A. Rowe Jr.:
I'd agree. My thoughts on OP's posts, that their specific PHP
scripts are modifying the global timezone
There was an issue with 2.4.11 and in 2.4.12 there is nothing
mentioned in the change file what is reverted. There must be in 2.4.11
a change which was causing a issue, and the changes from 2.4.11 are
included. So the CHANGES is not accurate.
Revert changes are mentioned formerly see for
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Steffen i...@apachelounge.com wrote:
There was an issue with 2.4.11 and in 2.4.12 there is nothing mentioned in
the change file what is reverted. There must be in 2.4.11 a change which was
causing a issue, and the changes from 2.4.11 are included. So the
On Wed, 28 Jan 2015 23:16:06 +0100
Steffen i...@apachelounge.com wrote:
There was an issue with 2.4.11 and in 2.4.12 there is nothing
mentioned in the change file what is reverted. There must be in
2.4.11 a change which was causing a issue, and the changes from
2.4.11 are included. So the
Btw.
For users it can now be questionable if the 2.4.11 changes are included in
2.4.12
-Original Message-
From: Steffen
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 11:16 PM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: [CLOSED] Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.12 as GA
There was an issue
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 6:03 PM, William A. Rowe Jr.
wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
Changes with Apache 2.4.13
*) Reverted DirectoryMatch behavior regression introduced in 2.4.12
(not released).
To keep it in this thread, I tweaked this to be 2.4.12 and 2.4.11
--
Eric Covener
The above VOTE is now CLOSED, with the result that, with
sufficient +1 (binding) votes, the VOTE PASSES and the
2.4.12 tarballs will be released as GA.
I will push them to the mirrors and we will likely announce
tomorrow.
Thx again to all testers and users of Apache httpd!
On Jan 22, 2015, at
On 1/27/15, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
Hi Nick, Noel,
I presume you are each running mod_php (and not php's fcgi sapi)?
Are you doing so with prefork mpm, or the win32/worker mpm? Did
you build php TS?
I am running mod_php yes,prefork, and php TS.
Did you update any
On Mon, 26 Jan 2015 16:43:29 -0500
Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
I'll give the vote another 24 hours... I don't consider the
UTC/logging issue enough to hold the release, unless it appears
a symptom of a more serious problem, but want to give us some
more time to try to get a handle
Am 27.01.2015 um 21:41 schrieb William A. Rowe Jr.:
On Mon, 26 Jan 2015 16:43:29 -0500
Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
I'll give the vote another 24 hours... I don't consider the
UTC/logging issue enough to hold the release, unless it appears
a symptom of a more serious problem, but
On 28/01/2015 06:41, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
There is a possibility that OP's had actually rebuilt APR (from the
-deps), even with the very same APR version, which resulting in some
different autoconf detection on their platform relative to time.h
function handling. It would be worth
Am 22.01.2015 um 19:54 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.12 can be found
at the usual place:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.12 GA.
[X] +1: Good to go
[ ] +0: meh
[ ] -1: Danger Will
On 1/22/2015 10:54 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.12 can be found
at the usual place:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.12 GA.
[X] +1: Good to go
[ ] +0: meh
[ ] -1: Danger Will
I used 2.4.11 because no-one mentioned any issues with
that release
On Jan 26, 2015, at 8:14 AM, Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
svn diff https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/tags/2.4.11
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
svn diff https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/tags/2.4.11
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/tags/2.4.12 | cdiff
first one should be 2.4.10 (not that it turns up anything better)
What about APR
Hmmm:
svn diff https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/tags/2.4.11
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/tags/2.4.12 | cdiff
shows nothing that would account for this behavior, afaict.
On Jan 25, 2015, at 8:23 PM, Noel Butler noel.but...@ausics.net wrote:
On 25/01/2015
Hi Nick, Noel,
I presume you are each running mod_php (and not php's fcgi sapi)?
Are you doing so with prefork mpm, or the win32/worker mpm? Did
you build php TS?
Did you update any aspect of php between your 2.4.10 and 2.4.12
test cases?
On Mon, 26 Jan 2015 11:23:20 +1000
Noel Butler
Am 26.01.2015 um 14:14 schrieb Eric Covener:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
svn diff https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/tags/2.4.11
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/tags/2.4.12 | cdiff
first one should be 2.4.10 (not that it
On Jan 26, 2015, at 10:21 AM, Rainer Jung rainer.j...@kippdata.de wrote:
Am 26.01.2015 um 14:14 schrieb Eric Covener:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
svn diff https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/tags/2.4.11
I'll give the vote another 24 hours... I don't consider the
UTC/logging issue enough to hold the release, unless it appears
a symptom of a more serious problem, but want to give us some
more time to try to get a handle on it.
Hi Bill,
Yes mod_php, with event worker on linux, and php was built as thread
safe.
As this is my personal box (always the live guinea pig after dev box
before the public productions), I had not got around to php 5.5.21
recently released, I am going to pop that in shortly, if any changes
On 27/01/2015 03:21, Rainer Jung wrote:
Am 26.01.2015 um 14:14 schrieb Eric Covener:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote: svn
diff https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/tags/2.4.11 [1]
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/tags/2.4.12 [2]
On 25/01/2015 17:21, Nick Edwards wrote:
I am noticing a number of hits using UTC with this version?
Not all, only some, is anyone else seeing this?
Does not occur on 2.4.10.
They are php pages, however, the main site which is php is static, it
only uses php for counter nothing else, its
I am noticing a number of hits using UTC with this version?
Not all, only some, is anyone else seeing this?
Does not occur on 2.4.10.
They are php pages, however, the main site which is php is static, it
only uses php for counter nothing else, its all hard written in vi.
On 1/23/15, Jim
On Jan 22, 2015, at 11:54 AM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.12 can be found
at the usual place:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.12 GA.
[X] +1: Good to go
[ ]
On Jan 22, 2015, at 1:54 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.12 can be found
at the usual place:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.12 GA.
[X] +1: Good to go
On 24/01/2015 00:56, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Jan 22, 2015, at 1:54 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote: The
pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.12 can be found at the usual
place: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ [1] I'm calling a VOTE on releasing
these as Apache
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
[ ] +1: Good to go
+1 AIX 7.1/xlc/PPC64 100% tests pass.
The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.12 can be found
at the usual place:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.12 GA.
[ ] +1: Good to go
[ ] +0: meh
[ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why.
Vote will last the normal 72
36 matches
Mail list logo
