Thanks!
> Am 23.07.2018 um 11:27 schrieb Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group
> :
>
>
Wrong revision. Correct one is r1836472.
Regards
Rüdiger
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group
> Gesendet: Montag, 23. Juli 2018 11:26
> An: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Betreff: AW: ocsp_force_default initialized with UNSET in httpd 2.4.34
&
This is now backported to 2.4.x as r1555631 and will be part of the next
release.
Regards
Rüdiger
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Frank Meier
> Gesendet: Freitag, 20. Juli 2018 09:26
> An: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: ocsp_force_default initialized with UNSET
liche Nachricht-
>> Von: Stefan Eissing
>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 19. Juli 2018 11:10
>> An: dev@httpd.apache.org
>> Betreff: Re: ocsp_force_default initialized with UNSET in httpd 2.4.34
>>
>> You'll take care of it, Rüdiger?
>>
>>> Am 18.07
On 18/07/18 13:57, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 07/18/2018 11:44 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote:
Am 18.07.2018 um 11:37 schrieb Yann Ylavic :
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 11:29 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
Good catch. Maybe a dirty working copy during backport? Yann?
Actually the change was in the
p_force_default initialized with UNSET in httpd 2.4.34
>
> You'll take care of it, Rüdiger?
>
> > Am 18.07.2018 um 13:57 schrieb Ruediger Pluem :
> >
> >
> >
> > On 07/18/2018 11:44 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote:
> >>> Am 18.07.2018 um 11:37 schrieb Yann Yla
You'll take care of it, Rüdiger?
> Am 18.07.2018 um 13:57 schrieb Ruediger Pluem :
>
>
>
> On 07/18/2018 11:44 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote:
>>> Am 18.07.2018 um 11:37 schrieb Yann Ylavic :
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 11:29 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
Good catch. Maybe a dirty
On 07/18/2018 11:44 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote:
>> Am 18.07.2018 um 11:37 schrieb Yann Ylavic :
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 11:29 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
>>>
>>> Good catch. Maybe a dirty working copy during backport? Yann?
>>
>> Actually the change was in the proposed patch:
>>
> Am 18.07.2018 um 11:37 schrieb Yann Ylavic :
>
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 11:29 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
>>
>> Good catch. Maybe a dirty working copy during backport? Yann?
>
> Actually the change was in the proposed patch:
>
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 11:29 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
>
> Good catch. Maybe a dirty working copy during backport? Yann?
Actually the change was in the proposed patch:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/patches/2.4.x/ssl-ocsp-enable-leaf.patch
A subtle difference between trunk and
On 07/18/2018 11:04 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote:
> It looks as if that was added when ylavic backported?
>
> r1834089 has the change, but is supposed to be a merge of r1826995, r1827001
> where this change is not present? (If i read that correctly).
>
Good catch. Maybe a dirty working copy
It looks as if that was added when ylavic backported?
r1834089 has the change, but is supposed to be a merge of r1826995, r1827001
where this change is not present? (If i read that correctly).
> Am 18.07.2018 um 10:19 schrieb Frank Meier :
>
> We experience a problem with OCSP since Apache
On 07/18/2018 10:19 AM, Frank Meier wrote:
> We experience a problem with OCSP since Apache HTTP Server 2.4.34.
> Certificates, which do include a OCSP responder URL
> and worked well with 2.4.33 are now reported that they don't. Log Message:
> "AH01918: no OCSP responder specified in
>
We experience a problem with OCSP since Apache HTTP Server 2.4.34.
Certificates, which do include a OCSP responder URL and worked well with
2.4.33 are now reported that they don't. Log Message: "AH01918: no OCSP
responder specified in certificate and no default configured".
After git bisect I
14 matches
Mail list logo
