Re: cvs commit: modperl-2.0/t/filter/TestFilter input_msg.pm

2001-04-24 Thread Doug MacEachern
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Stas Bekman wrote: > I did (cvs up'ped both trees!), something doesn't get cleaned up. I didn't > use 'make clean'. Will make sure to use 'make clean' from now on. yeah, i always run 'make testclean && ./buildconf' after cvs up httpd-2.0 > I did yet another 'cvs up' to get

Re: cvs commit: modperl-2.0/t/filter/TestFilter input_msg.pm

2001-04-24 Thread Stas Bekman
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Doug MacEachern wrote: > > [Wed Apr 25 11:43:13 2001] [notice] child pid 19955 exit signal > > Segmentation fault (11) > > > > => no core file > > you can always do this: > % t/TEST -debug > > in another shell: > % t/TEST -run > > then the -debug shell will have a (gdb) promp

Re: cvs commit: modperl-2.0/t/filter/TestFilter input_msg.pm

2001-04-24 Thread Doug MacEachern
> [Wed Apr 25 11:43:13 2001] [notice] child pid 19955 exit signal > Segmentation fault (11) > > => no core file you can always do this: % t/TEST -debug in another shell: % t/TEST -run then the -debug shell will have a (gdb) prompt, type 'where' for stacktrace. > Server built: Apr 18 2001 17

Re: cvs commit: modperl-2.0/t/filter/TestFilter input_msg.pm

2001-04-24 Thread Stas Bekman
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Doug MacEachern wrote: > On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Stas Bekman wrote: > > > 5.6.1 doesn't dump a core with this patch :) and make test starts > > normally. > > cool. > > > Now I get: > > > > filter/input_msgmalformed response at > > /home/stas/apache.org/modperl-2.0/blib/lib/A

Re: BUG: mod_perl.config.sh fails unless Apache::ExtUtils available

2001-04-24 Thread Doug MacEachern
thanks, we'll look into this before 1.26 On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Paul Sharpe wrote: > The following approach to building mod_perl fails if mod_perl.config.sh > can't find Apache::ExtUtils (e.g. the first time you build mod_perl) > as perl_cc is not defined so the Apache config doesn't know which C

Re: dual server setup with 2.0?

2001-04-24 Thread Doug MacEachern
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Stas Bekman wrote: > with 2.0 you can get the same effeciency as you have had before with a > dual server setup. i would make that claim just yet, until its proven. in theory though, it will be possible. --

RE: Makefile.PL patch

2001-04-24 Thread Doug MacEachern
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Stas Bekman wrote: > Doug? Should we add all these? > > If we could just get @ARGV, that would be the simplest and no hardcoded > data... we should continue to filter out the junk, and just add PERL_SSI and PERL_SECTIONS. easy to see why 2.0 uses a MP_ prefix for all Make

RE: Makefile.PL patch

2001-04-24 Thread Doug MacEachern
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Geoffrey Young wrote: > Hi Stas... > > I was just looking over apaci/modperl.config and saw that it includes a > bunch of stuff not in MyConfig.pm. I'm not even sure of the status of some > of these arguments (like PERL_STASH_POST_DATA is pretty much deprecated but > I ha

Re: cvs commit: modperl-2.0/t/filter/TestFilter input_msg.pm

2001-04-24 Thread Doug MacEachern
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Stas Bekman wrote: > 5.6.1 doesn't dump a core with this patch :) and make test starts > normally. cool. > Now I get: > > filter/input_msgmalformed response at > /home/stas/apache.org/modperl-2.0/blib/lib/Apache/TestRequest.pm line 191. and t/logs/error_log says wha

Re: cvs commit: modperl-2.0/t/filter/TestFilter input_msg.pm

2001-04-24 Thread Stas Bekman
On 25 Apr 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > dougm 01/04/24 19:02:20 > > Modified:Apache-Test/lib/Apache TestConfigPerl.pm >t/filter/TestFilter input_msg.pm > Log: > seems that Perls < bleedperl leak __DATA__ filehandles > this causes a core dump if a .pm containing

Re: Minor patch to modperl_dev.pod

2001-04-24 Thread Stas Bekman
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, barries wrote: > Well, I got mod_perl installed & tested as recommended in > modperl_dev.pod, and I thought I'd try to make it a little easier for > others. I'm not sure if I've overlooked something that would have made > it easier for me, however, and I presonally can't say

Minor patch to modperl_dev.pod

2001-04-24 Thread barries
Well, I got mod_perl installed & tested as recommended in modperl_dev.pod, and I thought I'd try to make it a little easier for others. I'm not sure if I've overlooked something that would have made it easier for me, however, and I presonally can't say why I think 5.6.1 won't cut it, I'm passing o

BUG: mod_perl.config.sh fails unless Apache::ExtUtils available

2001-04-24 Thread Paul Sharpe
The following approach to building mod_perl fails if mod_perl.config.sh can't find Apache::ExtUtils (e.g. the first time you build mod_perl) as perl_cc is not defined so the Apache config doesn't know which C compiler to user to build mod_perl. mod_perl-1.25% perl Makefile.PL APACHE_SRC=../apache

RE: Makefile.PL patch

2001-04-24 Thread Stas Bekman
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Geoffrey Young wrote: > Hi Stas... > > I was just looking over apaci/modperl.config and saw that it includes a > bunch of stuff not in MyConfig.pm. I'm not even sure of the status of some > of these arguments (like PERL_STASH_POST_DATA is pretty much deprecated but > I hav

RE: Makefile.PL patch

2001-04-24 Thread Geoffrey Young
Hi Stas... I was just looking over apaci/modperl.config and saw that it includes a bunch of stuff not in MyConfig.pm. I'm not even sure of the status of some of these arguments (like PERL_STASH_POST_DATA is pretty much deprecated but I have no idea about XS_IMPORT), but PERL_SECTIONS and PERL_

Re: dual server setup with 2.0?

2001-04-24 Thread Stas Bekman
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Vivek Khera wrote: > > "SB" == Stas Bekman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > SB> sense to kill the dual server setup as we endorse now (where mod_perl is > SB> the backend) and have only one server, with different pools. > > Another benefit of the front/back end setup is th

Re: dual server setup with 2.0?

2001-04-24 Thread Vivek Khera
> "SB" == Stas Bekman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: SB> sense to kill the dual server setup as we endorse now (where mod_perl is SB> the backend) and have only one server, with different pools. Another benefit of the front/back end setup is that the ligthweight front-ends buffer the output fro