Re: t/apr/bucket is dumping core on me

2004-10-08 Thread Joe Orton
On Thu, Oct 07, 2004 at 09:20:23AM -0400, Joe Schaefer wrote: > "Philippe M. Chiasson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > [...] > > > #2 0x0021b45c in apr_bucket_alloc_create_ex (allocator=0x0) at > > apr_buckets_alloc.c:67 > > #3 0x0021b405 in apr_bucket_alloc_create (p=0x9353f70) at > > APU_DEC

Re: t/modules/proxy.t failure with 2.1

2004-10-08 Thread Joe Orton
On Thu, Oct 07, 2004 at 04:04:16PM -0400, Geoffrey Young wrote: > hi all... > > just FYI, 2.1 is failing t/modules/proxy.t with a 404. I've spent some time > this afternoon trying to see what (of importance) has changed in between 2.0 > and HEAD but I can't see where it is at the moment. I don't

Re: t/modules/proxy.t failure with 2.1

2004-10-08 Thread Geoffrey Young
> I don't know who else is running nightly regression tests here. I have > just synched the results from the builds I started running with > httpd+mod_perl-from-CVS on a few machines here: > > http://www.apache.org/~jorton/regress/mod_perl.html very cool. what are you using to generate that? f

Re: t/modules/proxy.t failure with 2.1

2004-10-08 Thread Stas Bekman
Joe Orton wrote: On Thu, Oct 07, 2004 at 04:04:16PM -0400, Geoffrey Young wrote: hi all... just FYI, 2.1 is failing t/modules/proxy.t with a 404. I've spent some time this afternoon trying to see what (of importance) has changed in between 2.0 and HEAD but I can't see where it is at the moment. I

Re: t/modules/proxy.t failure with 2.1

2004-10-08 Thread Joe Orton
On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 10:08:21AM -0400, Stas Bekman wrote: > And it'd be nice for the failing test to run t/REPORT and include it in > the output. W/o it we know almost nothing about what perl and apache > builds were used. I guessed you'd say that... I've changed the script to append ./t/REPO

Re: thread pools & dynamic config (was Re: segfault in worker mpm)

2004-10-08 Thread Stas Bekman
Joe Schaefer wrote: Stas Bekman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Joe Schaefer wrote: [...] Obviously I don't see why that is so. In fact, I see that it is already implemented in parts of mod_perl, for instance when registering a pool-cleanup callback: $sp->cleanup_register(sub { print @{ $_[0] ||

Re: t/modules/proxy.t failure with 2.1

2004-10-08 Thread Stas Bekman
Joe Orton wrote: On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 10:08:21AM -0400, Stas Bekman wrote: And it'd be nice for the failing test to run t/REPORT and include it in the output. W/o it we know almost nothing about what perl and apache builds were used. I guessed you'd say that... I've changed the script to appe

Re: t/modules/proxy.t failure with 2.1

2004-10-08 Thread Joe Orton
On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 10:27:23AM -0400, Stas Bekman wrote: > Joe Orton wrote: > >On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 10:08:21AM -0400, Stas Bekman wrote: > > > >>And it'd be nice for the failing test to run t/REPORT and include it in > >>the output. W/o it we know almost nothing about what perl and apache

[Patch mp2] Use Devel::GDB to auto backtrace core dumps in t/* in t/REPORT

2004-10-08 Thread Philippe M. Chiasson
Happened onto the cute Devel::GDB module and quickly wiped out a patch to make t/REPORT attempt to automatically generate back traces for core files it finds in t/ Any interest in this ? Index: Apache-Test/lib/Apache/TestReport.pm

Re: segfault in worker mpm

2004-10-08 Thread Philippe M. Chiasson
Stas Bekman wrote: Stas Bekman wrote: Philippe M. Chiasson wrote: Stas Bekman wrote: I did some binary search and found that: mp2-20040922 - no core mp2-20040923 - core So we need to diff these two checkouts... For a start, I've got these changes exposed in between those 2 dates: http://www.apac

Re: thread pools & dynamic config (was Re: segfault in worker mpm)

2004-10-08 Thread Joe Schaefer
Stas Bekman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Joe Schaefer wrote: > > Stas Bekman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] > >>Anti-Example 1: parent interpreter compiles the anon-sub, which > >>interpreter are you going to stick to that anon-sub? > > A: As I stated, I expect the intepreter which invokes