Re: AW: SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY

2007-09-17 Thread Joe Orton
On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 09:08:26AM -0500, William Rowe wrote: Joe Orton wrote: On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 09:47:24PM +0200, Ruediger Pluem wrote: On 09/10/2007 08:40 AM, Plüm wrote: That was the goal of my diagnostic patch: Finding out if we have a pool issue. Looks like we have. I guess the

Re: AW: SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY

2007-09-13 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
Joe Orton wrote: On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 09:47:24PM +0200, Ruediger Pluem wrote: On 09/10/2007 08:40 AM, Plüm wrote: That was the goal of my diagnostic patch: Finding out if we have a pool issue. Looks like we have. I guess the right fix is as you say to use the parent pool (process scope).

Re: AW: SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY

2007-09-12 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Looking at the scope of all these static calls, I really believe the patch is this simple (process-pool survives the entire httpd); Sorry - scratch that. I wasn't counting the frequency of pstrdup calls. Just begging for

Re: AW: SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY

2007-09-12 Thread Plüm , Rüdiger , VF-Group
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: William A. Rowe, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Mittwoch, 12. September 2007 09:47 An: dev@httpd.apache.org Betreff: Re: AW: SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Looking at the scope of all

Re: AW: SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY

2007-09-12 Thread Zvi Har'El
I have tested the patch and it works fine. Thanks a lot. On 12/09/07 13:14, Plüm wrote: -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: William A. Rowe, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Mittwoch, 12. September 2007 09:47 An: dev@httpd.apache.org Betreff: Re: AW: SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY

Re: AW: SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY

2007-09-12 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
Plüm wrote: Also looks good for me. Thanks for working this out. Mind to attach this patch to PR43334 (https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43334) so that people there can test? Better yet, committed the patch to trunk and pointed the url @ the commit.

Re: AW: SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY

2007-09-12 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Sep 12, 2007, at 3:47 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Looking at the scope of all these static calls, I really believe the patch is this simple (process-pool survives the entire httpd); Sorry - scratch that. I wasn't counting the

Re: AW: SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY

2007-09-11 Thread Joe Orton
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 09:47:24PM +0200, Ruediger Pluem wrote: On 09/10/2007 08:40 AM, Plüm wrote: That was the goal of my diagnostic patch: Finding out if we have a pool issue. Looks like we have. I guess the right fix is as you say to use the parent pool (process scope). Not 100%

Re: AW: SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY

2007-09-11 Thread Plüm , Rüdiger , VF-Group
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Joe Orton Gesendet: Dienstag, 11. September 2007 11:35 An: dev@httpd.apache.org Betreff: Re: AW: SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 09:47:24PM +0200, Ruediger Pluem wrote: On 09/10/2007 08:40 AM, Plüm wrote: That was the goal of my

Re: AW: SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY

2007-09-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
What with this and the Win32/apr issues, seems to me that we should consider a 2.2.7 out soonish :)

Re: AW: SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY

2007-09-11 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
Jim Jagielski wrote: What with this and the Win32/apr issues, seems to me that we should consider a 2.2.7 out soonish :) I was about to suggest the same :) With Win32/APR there isn't a fix. Not yet at least, Tom Donovan and I are going back and forth with ideas that break the fewest binaries

Re: AW: SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY

2007-09-11 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
Looking at the scope of all these static calls, I really believe the patch is this simple (process-pool survives the entire httpd); Index: ssl_engine_vars.c === --- ssl_engine_vars.c (revision 574494) +++ ssl_engine_vars.c

Re: AW: SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY

2007-09-11 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Looking at the scope of all these static calls, I really believe the patch is this simple (process-pool survives the entire httpd); Sorry - scratch that. I wasn't counting the frequency of pstrdup calls. Just begging for optimization :)

AW: SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY

2007-09-10 Thread Plüm , Rüdiger , VF-Group
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: William A. Rowe, Jr. Gesendet: Montag, 10. September 2007 07:50 An: dev@httpd.apache.org Betreff: Re: SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY Zvi Har'El wrote: This looks similar to PR 43334 (https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43334). Could

Re: AW: SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY

2007-09-10 Thread Ruediger Pluem
On 09/10/2007 08:40 AM, Plüm wrote: -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: William A. Rowe, Jr. Gesendet: Montag, 10. September 2007 07:50 An: dev@httpd.apache.org Betreff: Re: SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY Zvi Har'El wrote: This looks similar to PR 43334 (https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla

Re: SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY

2007-09-09 Thread Ruediger Pluem
On 09/08/2007 08:40 PM, Zvi Har'El wrote: Hi, I installed the new httpd 2.2.6 on several machines. One of them runs RedHat Enterprise Linux. Another is Solaris 2.9. When looking at the SSL environment variables in a simple CGI, I notticed that on the Linux machine, SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY

Re: SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY

2007-09-09 Thread Zvi Har'El
Yes. This fixed the problem: Now I get SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY=OpenSSL/0.9.8e On 09/09/07 22:12, Ruediger Pluem wrote: On 09/08/2007 08:40 PM, Zvi Har'El wrote: Hi, I installed the new httpd 2.2.6 on several machines. One of them runs RedHat Enterprise Linux. Another is Solaris 2.9. When

Re: SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY

2007-09-09 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
Zvi Har'El wrote: This looks similar to PR 43334 (https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43334). Could you please test my diagnostic patch from there? Yup - that patch would solve it since we don't reinit static char*library to null on every unload/reload cycle. The fix is

SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY

2007-09-08 Thread Zvi Har'El
Hi, I installed the new httpd 2.2.6 on several machines. One of them runs RedHat Enterprise Linux. Another is Solaris 2.9. When looking at the SSL environment variables in a simple CGI, I notticed that on the Linux machine, SSL_VERSION_LIBRARY is not set at all, and in the Solaris machine