Unfinished threads

2004-03-03 Thread Stas Bekman
It'd be nice to have resolution for these threads. Not necessarily fix but to have an action plan. Thanks. - http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=10642732561&r=1&w=2 - http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=10763594292&r=1&w=2 - This one is mixed up with many other unrelated issues, but look at tho

Re: we now have unescaped error_log

2004-03-03 Thread Stas Bekman
Stas Bekman wrote: Geoffrey Young wrote: hi all late last week, the ability to have an unescaped error_log was ported from 2.1 to 2.0 and 1.3. for 2.1 and 2.0, I now build apache with $ CFLAGS="-DAP_UNSAFE_ERROR_LOG_UNESCAPED" ./configure --with-mpm=worker ... for 1.3, I just add PERL_E

Re: cvs commit: modperl-2.0/src/modules/perl modperl_env.c

2004-03-03 Thread Stas Bekman
Stas Bekman wrote: Geoffrey Young wrote: move modperl_env_default_populate to where it was before (after modperl_env_table_populate), so that GATEWAY_INTERFACE will be CGI-Perl/1.1 and not CGI/1.1. whoops - I probably moved that at some point and didn't realize it. I wonder why modules/cgi.

Re: compiling on win32

2004-03-03 Thread Geoffrey Young
> Hi Geoff, >Unfortunately, in an effort to keep users up-to-date > (read: help build Mr Gates a bigger house), there's quite > a few incompatible changes between VC++ 5 and 6. Win32 > Apache builds with 6 - I believe it can also do so with > 5, but I'm not sure how (Bill Rowe probably knows).

Re: compiling on win32

2004-03-03 Thread Randy Kobes
On Wed, 3 Mar 2004, Geoffrey Young wrote: > hi all (especially randy and steve) > > ok, so I'm trying to compile things on win32 (win2k with VC++ 5.0). I've > followed the mp2 instructions, which pointed me toward compiling Apache 2.0 > from sources. I'm using the official 2.0.48 sources. > > so

Re: dynamic request hook ordering (take 2)

2004-03-03 Thread Steve Hay
Geoffrey Young wrote: >>>the only thing I could suggest at this point is to comment out the >>>apr_hook_sort_all() call in modperl_apache_resort_hooks() to see if there >>>isn't something about that function (or calling it) that is mucking up the >>>works. what that would leave is the altering of