+1 for me (tested on debian).
- Original Message
From: Issac Goldstand mar...@beamartyr.net
To: apreq-dev@httpd.apache.org
Cc: d...@httpd.apache.org; modp...@perl.apache.org
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 4:48:30 AM
Subject: [RELEASE CANDIDATE] libapreq2 2.11
The apreq
Issac Goldstand wrote:
Please give the tarball at
http://people.apache.org/~issac/libapreq2-2.11.tar.gz
a try and report comments/problems/etc. to the apreq-dev list
at apreq-...@httpd.apache.org.
I have a build error using VC++ 2005 on Win32 with perl-5.10.0,
apache-2.2.10,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Issac Goldstand wrote:
The apreq developers are planning a maintenance release of
libapreq2. This version addresses several bugfixes and includes new
features.
+1
Tested on httpd-2.2.10/perl5.6.10/mp-2.0.4 linux-32bit (debian sarge)
-BEGIN
+1 for me (tested on debian).
- Original Message
From: Issac Goldstand mar...@beamartyr.net
To: apreq-...@httpd.apache.org
Cc: dev@httpd.apache.org; modp...@perl.apache.org
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 4:48:30 AM
Subject: [RELEASE CANDIDATE] libapreq2 2.11
The apreq
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
+1
make, test, install with apache-1.41/perl-5.6.2/mp-1.30
Issac Goldstand wrote:
The apreq developers are planning a maintenance release of
libapreq1. This version primarily addresses an issue noted with
FireFox 2.0 truncating file uploads in
That's 3 +1s. Uploading to CPAN and announcing...
Issac Goldstand wrote:
+1
make, test, install with apache-1.41/perl-5.6.2/mp-1.30
Issac Goldstand wrote:
The apreq developers are planning a maintenance release of
libapreq1. This version primarily addresses an issue noted with
+1, tests and installs cleanly on Debian-testing
with apache 1.3.41 and mod_perl 1.30 and perl 5.8.x.
- Original Message
From: Issac Goldstand mar...@beamartyr.net
To: APREQ List apreq-...@httpd.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, January 8, 2009 11:35:22 AM
Subject: [RELEASE CANDIDATE]
I didn't vote because AFAIK I don't actually have a vote. I have commit
access, but I'm not a PMC member and therefore have no vote. Is that
correct?
-Original Message-
From: Issac Goldstand [mailto:mar...@beamartyr.net]
Sent: 07 January 2009 13:24
Cc: APREQ List
Subject: Re: [RELEASE
Steve Hay wrote:
I didn't vote because AFAIK I don't actually have a vote. I have commit
access, but I'm not a PMC member and therefore have no vote. Is that
correct?
You're not ? mumble grumble.
--
1024D/DB9B8C1C B90B
- Original Message
From: Steve Hay steve...@planit.com
To: Issac Goldstand mar...@beamartyr.net
Cc: APREQ List apreq-dev@httpd.apache.org
Sent: Wednesday, January 7, 2009 8:54:48 AM
Subject: RE: [RELEASE CANDIDATE] libapreq 1.34-RC4
I didn't vote because AFAIK I don't actually
Issac Goldstand wrote:
Yay! That makes just a 1.5 year release cycle ;)
Me. Thought i might be slow.
--
1024D/DB9B8C1C B90B FBC3 A3A1 C71A 8E70 3F8C 75B8 8FFB DB9B 8C1C
Philip M. Gollucci (pgollu...@p6m7g8.com) c:
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
Issac Goldstand wrote:
http://people.apache.org/~issac/libapreq-1.34-RC4.tar.gz
Unit tests blow up spectacularly on solaris 2.10 but I don't think we
support that and is related to Request.so failing to load.
It does compile.
I'll get a freebsd test for some sanity
Bojan Smojver wrote:
It has been over two years since the latest apreq2 release, so it is
time to get some new code out the door. Numerous bugs were fixed (see
the full list in the CHANGES file) since the last official release
(2.08), so please give us feedback on this release candidate.
Steve Hay wrote:
Issac Goldstand wrote:
The apreq developers are planning a maintenance release of
libapreq1. This version primarily addresses an issue noted
with FireFox 2.0 truncating file uploads in SSL mode.
Additionally, the memory allocation algorithm for multipart
requests has been
Bojan Smojver wrote:
http://people.apache.org/~bojan/libapreq2-2.10-RC1.tar.gz
zones.perl.apache.org:
sun os 5.10
perl 5.10.0 not threaded
httpd 2.2.10 prefork
mod_perl 2.0.3
glue/perl/t/apreq/cgi fails all 71 tests, but this is due to 'make' test
issues I'd bet.
from t/log/error_log:
On Wed, 2008-11-19 at 04:34 -0500, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
its 4:30am and I've not look at this code in a while, the debugging will
have to wait.
Also, I I'm pretty sure I want to merge 1-2 things from trunk to 2.10
that are low risk but important.
Cool. That's why we have RCs after
Bojan Smojver wrote:
It has been over two years since the latest apreq2 release, so it is
time to get some new code out the door. Numerous bugs were fixed (see
the full list in the CHANGES file) since the last official release
(2.08), so please give us feedback on this release candidate.
You
Bojan Smojver wrote:
It has been over two years since the latest apreq2 release, so it is
time to get some new code out the door. Numerous bugs were fixed (see
the full list in the CHANGES file) since the last official release
(2.08), so please give us feedback on this release candidate.
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 17:29 +1100, Bojan Smojver wrote:
It has been over two years since the latest apreq2 release, so it is
time to get some new code out the door. Numerous bugs were fixed (see
the full list in the CHANGES file) since the last official release
(2.08), so please give us
Bojan Smojver wrote:
Could people subscribed to mod_perl and httpd lists please forward this
e-mail there. Thanks!
fowarded.
--
Philip M. Gollucci ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) c: 703.336.9354
Consultant - P6M7G8 Inc.
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 02:01 -0500, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
(ahh, you were in unix group httpd, I've just added you)
I am not an httpd committer. I only have commit rights to apreq
directory.
--
Bojan
Bojan Smojver wrote:
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 02:01 -0500, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
(ahh, you were in unix group httpd, I've just added you)
I am not an httpd committer. I only have commit rights to apreq
directory.
Well it is what it is, subprojects and all..
--
Failed a few tests here, perl 5.8.8, apache 2.2.10, mod_perl 2.0.4
prefork, linux.
Can look at this more tomorrow.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] perl]$ ./t/TEST -verbose t/apreq/upload.t
[warning] setting ulimit to allow core files
ulimit -c unlimited; /usr/bin/perl
Ahem,
On that subject, libapreq1 is already a year and a half into it's latest
release cycle. We're still waiting for a PMC vote to finish the
release... Someone remind me to do a lightning talk about this next
time I'm at AC :)
Foo JH wrote:
Fantastic! Can I assume that libapreq will
Issac Goldstand wrote:
Ahem,
On that subject, libapreq1 is already a year and a half into it's latest
release cycle. We're still waiting for a PMC vote to finish the
release... Someone remind me to do a lightning talk about this next
time I'm at AC :)
Time for a FFT presentation - 15
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Issac Goldstand wrote:
Ahem,
On that subject, libapreq1 is already a year and a half into it's
latest release cycle. We're still waiting for a PMC vote to finish
the release... Someone remind me to do a lightning talk about this
next time I'm at AC :)
Time
Phillip,
If it helps you move along better and have more time to review both 1
2, I'll voulenteer to pick up RMing 2.09 in addition to 1.34 so we can
get them both out the door. Let me know.
Issac
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
Are we going to have 2.09 release? It's been quite some time since
Are we going to have 2.09 release? It's been quite some time since
RC2
actually, i'd like to see an RC3-- there was an issue I kept
complaining about that Joe was going to solve thanks to some testing
by [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- reference the posting on 2007.05.25
Supposedly, this is going
Are we going to have 2.09 release? It's been quite some time since RC2
actually, i'd like to see an RC3-- there was an issue I kept complaining
about that Joe was going to solve thanks to some testing by
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- reference the posting on 2007.05.25
The RC3 was what I meant.
what
Issac Goldstand wrote:
We're still waiting on a couple of PMC votes to roll. If anyone's got
time to make test and vote on this, it'd be great.
Issac
I remember testing this and giving a +1, and seeing another +1 from
Randy Kobes, but I can't seem to track down those emails in the
Are we going to have 2.09 release? It's been quite some time since RC2
went out...
--
Bojan
On Tue, 7 Aug 2007, Bojan Smojver wrote:
Are we going to have 2.09 release? It's been quite some time since RC2
went out...
That was the plan whenever I made the branch way long ago.
After moving, loosing a datacenter, and being swamped at work, I haven't
read a single mailing list since
We're still waiting on a couple of PMC votes to roll. If anyone's got
time to make test and vote on this, it'd be great.
Issac
Issac Goldstand wrote:
The apreq developers are planning a maintenance release of
libapreq1. This version primarily addresses an issue noted
with FireFox 2.0
On Mon, 4 Jun 2007, Fred Moyer wrote:
Issac Goldstand wrote:
Please give the tarball at
http://people.apache.org/~issac/libapreq-1.34-RC3.tar.gz
a try and report comments/problems/etc. to the apreq-dev list
at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
All tests OK on Fedora Core 5, perl 5.8.8, apache 1.3.37,
Issac Goldstand wrote:
Please give the tarball at
http://people.apache.org/~issac/libapreq-1.34-RC3.tar.gz
a try and report comments/problems/etc. to the apreq-dev list
at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
All tests OK on Fedora Core 5, perl 5.8.8, apache 1.3.37, mod_perl 1.30.
+1
After going too long without any tuits, I've gotten around to properly
testing this. Looks ok, although I didn't really do anything
in-depth. - I'm going to commit and roll another RC.
Issac
Joe Schaefer wrote:
Joe Schaefer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Issac Goldstand [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Joe Schaefer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Issac Goldstand [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The apreq developers are planning a maintenance release of
libapreq1. This version primarily addresses an issue noted
with FireFox 2.0 truncating file uploads in SSL mode.
Please give the tarball at
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007, Joe Schaefer wrote:
Joe Schaefer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Issac Goldstand [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The apreq developers are planning a maintenance release of
libapreq1. This version primarily addresses an issue noted
with FireFox 2.0 truncating file uploads in SSL
Issac Goldstand [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The apreq developers are planning a maintenance release of
libapreq1. This version primarily addresses an issue noted
with FireFox 2.0 truncating file uploads in SSL mode.
Please give the tarball at
Issac Goldstand wrote:
The apreq developers are planning a maintenance release of
libapreq1. This version primarily addresses an issue noted
with FireFox 2.0 truncating file uploads in SSL mode.
Please give the tarball at
http://people.apache.org/~issac/libapreq-1.34-RC2.tar.gz
a try and
Issac Goldstand wrote:
Please give the tarball at
http://people.apache.org/~issac/libapreq-1.34-RC1.tar.gz
a try and report comments/problems/etc. to the apreq-dev list
at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
All tests OK on WinXP (VC6) with perl-5.8.8, apache-1.3.34 and
mod_perl-1.29.
--
Joe Schaefer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Issac Goldstand [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The apreq developers are planning a maintenance release of
libapreq1. This version primarily addresses an issue noted
with FireFox 2.0 truncating file uploads in SSL mode.
Please give the tarball at
On 07/12/2006, at 9:14 PM, Graham Dumpleton wrote:
Once that is decided I'll roll the tarball, likely tonight. I
assume we'll use release-3-3-0b as the tag?
Based on past conventions, that tag seems appropriate. If all is
okay do we
then just retag as 3.0.1?
Hmmm, I think you know
Graham Dumpleton wrote:
On 07/12/2006, at 12:42 AM, Jim Gallacher wrote:
Graham Dumpleton wrote:
There were no more comments on basic apache.import_module()
documentation so I have tweaked a few last things, committed it
and marked as resolved the final issue in JIRA tagged for 3.3.
Thus,
Graham Dumpleton wrote:
There were no more comments on basic apache.import_module()
documentation so I have tweaked a few last things, committed it
and marked as resolved the final issue in JIRA tagged for 3.3.
Thus, unless anyone else has got any last minute issues, we should
be good to go
Steve Hay wrote:
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
A release candidate for Apache-Test 1.29-rc3 is now available.
http://people.apache.org/~pgollucci/at/Apache-Test-1.29-rc3.tar.gz
looks good on apache 2.2.2, perl 5.8.8
+1
--Geoff
PASS Win32 Perl-5.8.8 + Apache 2.2.3
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
A release candidate for Apache-Test 1.29-rc3 is now available.
http://people.apache.org/~pgollucci/at/Apache-Test-1.29-rc3.tar.gz
Please take the time to exercise the candidate through all your existing
applications that use
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
A release candidate for Apache-Test 1.29-rc3 is now available.
http://people.apache.org/~pgollucci/at/Apache-Test-1.29-rc3.tar.gz
All tests OK on Win32 using perl-5.8.8, apache-1.3.34 and mod_perl-1.29.
--
Radan
On Sat, 18 Nov 2006, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
A release candidate for Apache-Test 1.29-rc3 is now available.
http://people.apache.org/~pgollucci/at/Apache-Test-1.29-rc3.tar.gz
+1 - tested on
linux: Apache/2.0.55 (prefork)
Win32: Apache/2.2.3 (winnt)
--
best regards,
Randy Kobes
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
A release candidate for Apache-Test 1.29-rc3 is now available.
http://people.apache.org/~pgollucci/at/Apache-Test-1.29-rc3.tar.gz
+1
FreeBSD 6.1-release-p10
gcc 3.4.6
perl 5.8.8, httpd 2.2.3 prefork mpm
perl 5.8.8 w/ithreads httpd 2.2.3 worker mpm
I
OK.
New fresh builds of Perl 5.8.8, Apache 2.2.3, randy's apxs, mod_perl
2.0.3-rc2, Apache::Test-1.29-rc2, in their own clean tree, using VC6
(and Windows SDK just for building apache, for the ldap stuff)
So far so good. mod_perl was detected by Apache-Test this time (so I
guess we'll
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
Issac Goldstand wrote:
Following up on the FAIL report for win32:
Can you post your configuration steps -- I'm the wrong person to ask,
but someone else might know. I see Steve H. got passing results.
Just perl Makefile.PL, nmake, nmake test
Which CGI tests
Following up on the FAIL report for win32:
The new Apache-Test-1.29-RC2 runs the test suite for 2.08 just fine
(against mod_perl-2.0.3-RC2). However, here the test suite can't load
mod_perl (also mod_perl-2.0.3-RC2) into the server properly:
E:\cpp\libapreq2-2.09\glue\perlperl t\TEST -clean
Win32 (VS2003) - httpd/2.2.3 - ActivePerl 5.8.8.819
PASS Apache-Test
PASS mod_perl
FAIL libapreq2
libapreq passed the 2 sets of C-based tests and failed the 3rd set
(quite miserably), so it may just be a bug in Apache-Test. I'll look
into it and send a proper bug report with details to
Issac Goldstand wrote:
Win32 (VS2003) - httpd/2.2.3 - ActivePerl 5.8.8.819
PASS Apache-Test
PASS mod_perl
FAIL libapreq2
libapreq passed the 2 sets of C-based tests and failed the 3rd set
(quite miserably), so it may just be a bug in Apache-Test. I'll look
into it and send a proper bug report
All OK on Win32 using apache-2.2.2, perl-5.8.8 and mod_perl-2.0.3-RC2
--
Radan Computational Ltd.
The information contained in this message and any files transmitted with it are
confidential and intended for the addressee(s) only. If you have
On Wed, 2006-11-08 at 23:43 -0800, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
Please download, test, and report back on the following
candidate tarball:
http://people.apache.org/~pgollucci/apreq2/libapreq2-2.09.tar.gz
http://people.apache.org/~pgollucci/apreq2/libapreq2-2.09.tar.gz.asc
Issac Goldstand wrote:
Following up on the FAIL report for win32:
Can you post your configuration steps -- I'm the wrong person to ask,
but someone else might know. I see Steve H. got passing results.
Which CGI tests fail ?
The new Apache-Test-1.29-RC2 runs the test suite for 2.08 just
Hi All,
Deepest apologies.
The correct version is 1.29-RC2 not 1.27-RC2 which I mistyped in the
subject and part of the E-Mail text. The URL and tarball were/are
correct as they stand.
Again, apologies especially for the SPAM.
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
A release candidate for
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
Hi all, so it seems I dropped the ball on the releases. I'm about to
get back into it.
Does anyone know of any issues that are still oustanding from
mod_perl-2.0.3-RC1
Apache-Test 1.29-RC1
libapreq2 2.09-RC1
before I roll -RC2s. I'm pretty sure Apache-Test
Issac Goldstand [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
[...]
Sadly, I don't think this can go into the 2.x series because of our
conversioning rules.
New features need new symbols. SVN gets around this by doing:
void foo (void)
void foo2 (int)
Can you elaborate? I didn't
Issac Goldstand [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That's what I originally thought when told to do it this way, but its wrong.
RFC 3875 section 4.1.7 says
The server MUST set this variable; if the Script-URI does not include
a query component, the QUERY_STRING MUST be defined as an empty
Joe Schaefer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why not just use GATEWAY_INTERFACE? That way we don't need to argue
about the actual adoption of RFC 3875 (not a standard) vs the original
(ambiguous) CGI spec.
Actually I took a peek around, and I think both IIS and Tomcat support
3875. So as long as
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
this one time in band camp Issac Goldstand said on 10/29/06 01:41:
If you're planning on rolling libapreq-2.09 soon, maybe we should
include the intial work done in /branches/enhanced-cgi/
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/apreq/branches/enhanced-cgi/
It seems
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
Hi all, so it seems I dropped the ball on the releases. I'm about to
get back into it.
Does anyone know of any issues that are still oustanding from
mod_perl-2.0.3-RC1
Apache-Test 1.29-RC1
libapreq2 2.09-RC1
before I roll -RC2s. I'm pretty sure Apache-Test
this one time in band camp Issac Goldstand said on 10/29/06 01:41:
If you're planning on rolling libapreq-2.09 soon, maybe we should
include the intial work done in /branches/enhanced-cgi/
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/apreq/branches/enhanced-cgi/
It seems stable at the moment.
Hi,
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
mod_perl 2.0.3-rc1
NetBSD 3.0 i386 perl 5.8.8 w/o ithreads httpd 2.2.3 -1 pgollucci
t/apr-ext fail because of bad LD_LIBRARY_PATH / DynaLoader foo.
I believe people have brought this failure up before and even suggested a patch
for it.
Anyone want to point to these
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
mod_perl 2.0.3-rc1
NetBSD 3.0 i386 perl 5.8.8 w/o ithreads httpd 2.2.3 -1 pgollucci
t/apr-ext fail because of bad LD_LIBRARY_PATH / DynaLoader foo.
I believe people have brought this failure up before and even suggested a patch
for it.
Anyone want to point to these
On Thu, 7 Sep 2006, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
A release candidate for Apache-Test 1.29-RC1 is now available.
http://people.apache.org/~pgollucci/at/Apache-Test-1.29-rc1.tar.gz
+1. Tested on
- Win32: Apache/2.2.3 (winnt)
- linux: Apache/2.0.55 (prefork)
--
best regards,
Randy
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
Please download, test, and report back on the following
candidate tarball:
http://people.apache.org/~pgollucci/apreq2/libapreq2-2.09-rc1.tar.gz
All tests OK on Win32 (on a single run, at least--I'm not sure if the
previous problems with upload.t have gone away or
Works fine on FC4:
Linux xxx 2.6.16-1.2069_FC4smp #1 SMP Tue Mar 28 12:47:32 EST 2006
i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
On 9/7/06, Philip M. Gollucci [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please download, test, and report back on the following
candidate tarball:
Philip M. Gollucci [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Please download, test, and VOTE on the following
candidate tarball:
http://people.apache.org/~pgollucci/apreq2/libapreq2-2.08-RC5.tar.gz
+1, tested on Debian amd64 and FreeBSD 6.1.
--
Joe Schaefer
On Sun, 2006-08-06 at 21:40 -0700, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
Can you clue me in on this Fedora stuff and pardon my cluelessness.
I'm not really an FE expert, but I'll give it a go :-)
Do you test build it first, or just submit it to that service and it does
everything ?
Normally, I'll run
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
Please download, test, and VOTE on the following
candidate tarball:
http://people.apache.org/~pgollucci/apreq2/libapreq2-2.08-RC5.tar.gz
Changes from RC4:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=428216view=rev (Win32)
On Sun, 2006-08-06 at 19:46 -0700, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
Please download, test, and VOTE on the following
candidate tarball:
http://people.apache.org/~pgollucci/apreq2/libapreq2-2.08-RC5.tar.gz
Should appear in Fedora Extras soon.
--
Bojan
Sorry this took me so long to get back to - it did catch aprutil-1.lib
after using SVN mod_perl.
I'll try to build RC4.
Issac
Randy Kobes wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jul 2006, Randy Kobes wrote:
On Tue, 11 Jul 2006, Issac Goldstand wrote:
I wanted to test the build, since Randy said he couldn't,
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006, Randy Kobes wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006, Steve Hay wrote:
Yes, that works for me! I tried the individual test and the whole test
suite dozens of times over and didn't get a single failure. I'm not sure
how it makes any difference, though, or exactly what it does. I
Nevertheless, unless someone objects in the next
day or so, I'd like to commit this change, as I
think leaving temp files lying around is a worse
problem.
No objection here :)
--
Philip M. Gollucci ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Randy Kobes wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006, Steve Hay wrote:
Randy Kobes wrote:
Also, just to verify that it is the stray temp files
left over that are causing the problem, does it help
if you change the APR_EXCL flag in the call to apr_file_mktemp on
about line 832 of library/util.c
to
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006, Steve Hay wrote:
Yes, that works for me! I tried the individual test and
the whole test suite dozens of times over and didn't get a
single failure. I'm not sure how it makes any difference,
though, or exactly what it does. I searched the whole of
my httpd-2.2.2 folder
Steve Hay wrote:
Sorry, but I'm still seeing quite a few failures. I started with a
completely fresh build (with your patch applied) and the top-level
nmake test failed a bunch of upload.t tests first time. (So it's not
just running the test multiple times that causes the problem.)
I then
Randy Kobes wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006, Steve Hay wrote:
Sorry, but I'm still seeing quite a few failures. I started with a
completely fresh build (with your patch applied) and the top-level
nmake test failed a bunch of upload.t tests first time. (So it's
not just running the test multiple
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006, Steve Hay wrote:
Randy Kobes wrote:
Also, just to verify that it is the stray temp files
left over that are causing the problem, does it help
if you change the APR_EXCL flag in the
call to apr_file_mktemp on about line 832 of library/util.c
to APR_TRUNCATE?
Yep, that
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
Steve Hay wrote:
Sorry, but I'm still seeing quite a few failures. I started with a
completely fresh build (with your patch applied) and the top-level
nmake test failed a bunch of upload.t tests first time. (So it's not
just running the test multiple times that
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006, Steve Hay wrote:
Sorry, but I'm still seeing quite a few failures. I started with a
completely fresh build (with your patch applied) and the top-level nmake
test failed a bunch of upload.t tests first time. (So it's not just running
the test multiple times that causes
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
Randy Kobes wrote:
Which means
apr_pool_cleanup_register(pool, data,
apreq_file_cleanup, apreq_file_cleanup);
Contrary to the comment in library/util.c
data =
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
Randy Kobes wrote:
[Thu Jul 20 23:45:45 2006] [error] [client 127.0.0.1]
(OS 80)The file exists. :
apreq_brigade_concat failed; TempDir problem?
which is coming from about line 288 of
module/apache2/filter.c. The file exists message
I think comes from the fact
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
Randy Kobes wrote:
Which means
apr_pool_cleanup_register(pool, data,
apreq_file_cleanup, apreq_file_cleanup);
Contrary to the comment in library/util.c
data = apr_palloc(pool, sizeof *data);
/* cleanups
On Thu, 20 Jul 2006, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
Steve Hay wrote:
repeatedly from the glue/perl sub-directory and see whether or not it
ever fails for you. Did you get round to trying that?
Just did. 24 times. 100% success.
My usual combination of things.
Like Steve, I still see this
Quoting Philip M. Gollucci [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Please download, test, and VOTE on the following
candidate tarball:
http://people.apache.org/~pgollucci/apreq2/libapreq2-2.08-RC4.tar.gz
The Fedora Extras package (development) will be available after signing.
--
Bojan
I'm +1 on going for 3.2.10.
You in Canada probably have it easier - I think we hit 96F/35C at some
point today or yesterday (I wouldn't know I'm in the office which has AC
sunrise to sunset, I just listen to the news), and unfortunately (or not)
due to work pressures I have no time for
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006, Jim Gallacher wrote:
For 3.2.9 I called for 2 rounds of testing: one for the release
candidate and one for the final tarball. Do folks here feel that is
necessary for 3.2.10 or should I just jump right to the 3.2.10 final?
That tarball would still be subject to a vote on
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
(we'll just have to make a
3.2.11 then).
Let's call that one the Spinal Tap version. :)
Jim Gallacher wrote:
Deron Meranda wrote:
Just want some verification because I haven't seen anything
official looking
Is 3.2.9 now considered a bad release because of its memory
leaks, and thus will never be released?
It's not so much that it's a bad release, but rather it didn't
Just want some verification because I haven't seen anything
official looking
Is 3.2.9 now considered a bad release because of its memory
leaks, and thus will never be released? Hence 3.2.10 will be
the next hopeful stable release after 3.2.8?
--
Deron Meranda
Deron Meranda wrote:
Just want some verification because I haven't seen anything
official looking
Is 3.2.9 now considered a bad release because of its memory
leaks, and thus will never be released?
It's not so much that it's a bad release, but rather it didn't make
sense to officially
Graham Dumpleton wrote:
Jim Gallacher wrote ..
Shall we proceed with a 3.2.10 release with the current memory leak
fixes, or keep digging for more leaks?
Seeing as it's summer for most of us (except for Graham), I get the
feeling people don't have a lot of free time to spend on mod_python
Randy Kobes wrote:
On Sat, 8 Jul 2006, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
Please download, test, and VOTE on the following
candidate tarball:
http://people.apache.org/~pgollucci/apreq2/libapreq2-2.08-RC3.tar.gz
[ .. ]
I'd like to make the actual release around Wednesday of next week
(07/12/2006)
It didn't unpack on win32 using 7-zip either... But GNU tar (the native
binary from the unixutils project on sf, not under cygwin) worked ok
(except for symbolic links, but that shouldn't be so bad).
I wanted to test the build, since Randy said he couldn't, but ran into
troubles compiling
On Sat, 2006-07-08 at 03:39 -0700, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
Please download, test, and VOTE on the following
candidate tarball:
http://people.apache.org/~pgollucci/apreq2/libapreq2-2.08-RC3.tar.gz
Weird. I'm getting errors when unpacking the tarball:
201 - 300 of 435 matches
Mail list logo
