Henri Gomez schrieb:
/usr/include/apache2/ap_mmn.h
#ifndef MODULE_MAGIC_NUMBER_MAJOR
#define MODULE_MAGIC_NUMBER_MAJOR 20051115
#endif
#define MODULE_MAGIC_NUMBER_MINOR 5 /* 0...n */
Seems to be 2.2.5 :-(
Yes, it comes from 2.2.5, although generally there is no 1:1
Filip Hanik - Dev Lists schrieb:
now that we do have a module directory, I'd like to propose to take the
bayeux impl out of tomcat core, and put it into an individual module
reasons
1. It's built on top of Tomcat, but its not core tomcat
2. We can release it more frequently to fix bugs
3.
Rainer Jung schrieb:
Apache Tomcat Connectors 1.2.27 is:
[X] Stable - no major issues, no regressions
[ ] Beta - at least one significant issue -- tell us what it is
[ ] Alpha - multiple significant issues -- tell us what they are
Closing this vote with my own.
The result is:
5 votes +1
The Apache Tomcat team is pleased to announce the immediate availability
of version 1.2.27 of the Apache Tomcat Connectors.
It contains connectors, which allow a web server such as Apache HTTPD,
Microsoft IIS and Sun Web Server to act as a front end to the Tomcat web
application server.
This
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
Author: mturk
Date: Tue Nov 4 00:09:43 2008
New Revision: 711205
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=711205view=rev
Log:
Add 2008 news to the main page
Thanks for fixing this. I now also added 2008 news to the menu for all
pages and updated the live docs. I
Hi,
I tried to understand the usage of lastAccessedTime (lastAT) vs.
thisAccessedTime (thisAT) in Tomcat 6 (I suppost trunk is the same but
didn't yet check).
As I understand it, the two different timestamps get used, because when
a request is associated with a session and asks for the lastAT it
I noticed that our TC 6 source distribution does not contain any version
info (apart from the archive file name).
For TC 5.5 the file build.properties.default gets updated before tagging
with the correct version info, for TC 6 there's alway 6.0.0.0 in it and
6.0-snapshot.
I propose, that we
Remy Maucherat schrieb:
On Thu, 2008-11-06 at 00:09 +0100, Rainer Jung wrote:
I propose, that we start to increment the version number in
build.properties.default as part of the release process before tagging.
I propose that I won't do it.
There's no need for you to do it. Anyone can do
Mark Thomas wrote:
http://people.apache.org/~markt/patches/2008-10-31-tc4-wininstaller.patch
Can you explain a bit the motivation for all the path changes (including
the sub directory in the target path and adding *.* to the source)?
I might then well be able to vote for the second one too.
Mladen Turk schrieb:
Mladen Turk wrote:
Hello to the Tomcat team,
Native 1.1.16 has been available for testing for almost a week,
so I would like to proceed with the release vote.
So far only one binding vote has been recorded
(Thanks Henri), and mine by presumption.
So, Native 1.1.16
There are products, components, and versions. The versions are related
to products and not components. Putting pool and bayeux as components
under TC6 makes them a part of TC 6. I thought they are separate
modules, because their lifecycle and release cycles are not 1:1 with Tomcat.
So since
Mladen Turk schrieb:
Apache Tomcat Native 1.1.16 is:
[X] Stable - no major issues, no regressions
[ ] Beta - at least one significant issue -- tell us what it is
[ ] Alpha - multiple significant issues -- tell us what they are
Additional remarks (I'm going to help with those changes to,
Mladen Turk schrieb:
We have now two branches 1.1 and trunk
So in trunk the version is 1.2.x
The second branch is:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/connectors/branches/native/1.1.x
So I suppose those changes has to go in there as well.
It would be probably easier if this was done
Mark Thomas schrieb:
Hi all,
This patch http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/current/tc4.1.x/STATUS.txt
needs one more vote before I can included it in 4.1.x and roll the 4.1.39
release after the 4.1.38 release was aborted.
If anyone can spare a couple of minutes to review it, it would
Mark Thomas schrieb:
sebb wrote:
On 19/11/2008, Mark Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
sebb wrote:
I meant where to find the tag directory for the release 4.1.39.
It is in your inbox. Look at the svn commit messages.
Which all seem to be against trunk, i.e. not a tag.
I meant the
Mark Thomas schrieb:
According to the release process, the 4.1.39 tag is:
[ ] Broken
[ ] Alpha
[ ] Beta
[X] Stable
Regards,
Rainer
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL
Hi,
motivated by a bug report I had a look at the handling of the optional
route attribute in the AJP protocol.
I noticed, that mod_jk never seems to actuall set the attribute, and
that the AJP connectors on the Tomcat side extract it but never use it.
I don't know about the history, but does
On 15.12.2008 20:23, Eugenio Alvarez wrote:
Hi,
I am trying to find the right mail list to submit an enhancement to the
Tomcat IIS ISAPI redirect connector.
I have many (several hundred) instances of tomcat using the IIS ISAPI
redirect filter.
I updated to version 1.2.27 of the
On 01.01.2009 12:44, Remy Maucherat wrote:
On Thu, 2009-01-01 at 10:52 +, rj...@apache.org wrote:
Author: rjung
Date: Thu Jan 1 02:52:46 2009
New Revision: 730523
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=730523view=rev
Log:
Sync methods implemented natively with their Java
references.
Fixes
Hi,
I just fixed some glitches in tcnative. I noticed the following problem:
We now have two branches for jni, 1.1.x and trunk, actually they are
complete branches of the full connectors, so especially both contain the
native and the java side of JNI.
TC 5.5.x has an external reference to
Hi,
we now have tcnative 1.1.x and trunk. What's our goal w.r.t. API stability?
Citing from an earlier thread:
we do have a 1.1.x branch in tcnative which is supposed to be the stable
brach.
Ok. I thought this was still also used in 6.0. OTOH, the library should
be renamed so that both
Hi,
during syncing tcnative trunk with tc trunk I noticed the following
change to jni/Library.java:
http://svn.eu.apache.org/viewvc/tomcat/connectors/trunk/jni/java/org/apache/tomcat/jni/Library.java?r1=466585r2=671153diff_format=h
It includes a call to Throwable.printStackTrace() to ease
When checking the consistency between the native and the Java code of
tcnative I found the following differences, which are still open:
General differences
===
Methods implemented in pool.c but not available in Pool.java
On 02.01.2009 08:25, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
a) bundling native and org/apache/tomcat/jni code in one place in svn
and releasing together
or
b) separating only the native implementation
Option a) was used cause we didn't have separate tcnative
release when it was introduced
On 02.01.2009 11:57, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
On 02.01.2009 08:25, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
a) bundling native and org/apache/tomcat/jni code in one place in svn
and releasing together
or
b) separating only the native implementation
Option a) was used cause we
Hi,
On 12.02.2009 18:06, Petr Sumbera wrote:
Hi all,
From Tomcat tar archive I get:
ls -l apache-tomcat-6.0.18/conf/tomcat-users.xml
-rw--- 1 tomcat staff 1107 Jul 21 2008
apache-tomcat-6.0.18/conf/tomcat-users.xml
But Tomcat itself changes this during its first run:
ls -l
On 19.02.2009 16:39, Mladen Turk wrote:
Hi,
We have a bug in 1.2.27 that cause core in some configuration
scenarios (#46352). The fix is in the SVN for more then a month.
Beyond that there are two additional bug fixes
one preventing Netware build, and other fixing IIS
advanced configuration
On 19.02.2009 13:55, mt...@apache.org wrote:
Author: mturk
Date: Thu Feb 19 12:55:05 2009
New Revision: 745842
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=745842view=rev
Log:
Allow dynamic worker address change
Modified: tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/common/jk_ajp_common.c
URL:
On 19.02.2009 16:28, mt...@apache.org wrote:
Author: mturk
Date: Thu Feb 19 15:28:47 2009
New Revision: 745898
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=745898view=rev
Log:
Update uriworkermap on watchog interval
Modified:
tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/iis/jk_isapi_plugin.c
On 25.02.2009 13:56, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
On 19.02.2009 16:28, mt...@apache.org wrote:
Author: mturk
Date: Thu Feb 19 15:28:47 2009
New Revision: 745898
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=745898view=rev
Log:
Update uriworkermap on watchog interval
Modified:
tomcat
On 25.02.2009 13:44, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
+ if (aw-addr_sequence != aw-s-addr_sequence) {
+ aw-addr_sequence = aw-s-addr_sequence;
+ aw-host = aw-s-hostname;
Should we copy the string here?
Nope, the string is now in shared memory.
In theory we don't care about ajp-host
we
On 19.02.2009 16:39, Mladen Turk wrote:
Hi,
We have a bug in 1.2.27 that cause core in some configuration
scenarios (#46352). The fix is in the SVN for more then a month.
Beyond that there are two additional bug fixes
one preventing Netware build, and other fixing IIS
advanced configuration
On 05.03.2009 09:23, Mark Thomas wrote:
I stumbled across some code in trunk for this. I had a poke around and as far as
I can tell this hasn't been supported for quite some time. What do people think
about removing it from mod_jk and trunk?
It is very unlikely, that it still works (although I
On 05.03.2009 07:38, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
On 19.02.2009 16:39, Mladen Turk wrote:
Hi,
We have a bug in 1.2.27 that cause core in some configuration
scenarios (#46352). The fix is in the SVN for more then a month.
Beyond that there are two additional bug fixes
one preventing
On 05.03.2009 07:50, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
Do you want to do the next steps, or should I?
BTW, I'd like that we this time use the common
httpd 2.0 and 2.2 versions for producing the
binaries. For 2.0 I'd suggest 2.0.52 (or 2.0.49)
and for 2.2 version 2.2.3.
For 1.3, 1.3.23
On 05.03.2009 10:03, Mark Thomas wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
I stumbled across some code in trunk for this. I had a poke around and
as far as
I can tell this hasn't been supported for quite some time. What do
people think
about removing it from mod_jk and trunk?
It is
On 05.03.2009 10:38, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
On 05.03.2009 07:50, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
Do you want to do the next steps, or should I?
BTW, I'd like that we this time use the common
httpd 2.0 and 2.2 versions for producing the
binaries. For 2.0 I'd suggest
On 05.03.2009 10:36, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
On 05.03.2009 10:03, Mark Thomas wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
I stumbled across some code in trunk for this. I had a poke around and
as far as
I can tell this hasn't been supported for quite some time. What do
people
Hi,
I uploaded testing tarballs of mod_jk 1.2.28-dev to
http://tomcat.apache.org/dev/dist/tomcat-connectors/jk/source
CAUTION: at this point in time the web server still shows the older
revision 750390. The revision I uploaded last was 750438. I already
waited 2 hours, but the sync seems to
On 05.03.2009 15:23, Rainer Jung wrote:
Hi,
I uploaded testing tarballs of mod_jk 1.2.28-dev to
http://tomcat.apache.org/dev/dist/tomcat-connectors/jk/source
CAUTION: at this point in time the web server still shows the older
revision 750390. The revision I uploaded last was 750438. I already
On 06.03.2009 08:39, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
On 05.03.2009 15:23, Rainer Jung wrote:
Hi,
I uploaded testing tarballs of mod_jk 1.2.28-dev to
http://tomcat.apache.org/dev/dist/tomcat-connectors/jk/source
CAUTION: at this point in time the web server still shows the older
On 06.03.2009 09:22, Mladen Turk wrote:
BZ 46808 is valid but it brings us back where we were before.
It solves (well doesn't actually) one thing,
but breaks the sticky sessions.
Unless the patch reliably detects the cause of failure
I'm -1 for committing that. The problem is that returned
codes
On 06.03.2009 13:32, Mladen Turk wrote:
Huge one Rainer ;)
I know, but I went through it in depth.
Rainer Jung wrote:
We have three busy counters:
a) one for the lb in total
b) one for each lb sub
c) one for each ajp worker
In status worker we use only a) and c). In lb we use a) and b
On 06.03.2009 14:19, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
On 06.03.2009 13:32, Mladen Turk wrote:
Huge one Rainer ;)
I know, but I went through it in depth.
Rainer Jung wrote:
We have three busy counters:
a) one for the lb in total
b) one for each lb sub
c) one for each ajp worker
On 06.03.2009 14:19, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
On 06.03.2009 13:32, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
All this should never touch the global state
if there are live connections.
Let the live connection decides for itself when it gets serviced.
Anything else is just plain
On 06.03.2009 16:24, bugzi...@apache.org wrote:
Mark Thomasma...@apache.org changed:
--- Comment #1 from Mark Thomasma...@apache.org 2009-03-06 07:23:59 PST ---
This is configurable and has been discussed several times on the users list.
Actually if no one really knows why this read and
On 06.03.2009 18:08, Mark Thomas wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
On 06.03.2009 16:24, bugzi...@apache.org wrote:
Mark Thomasma...@apache.org changed:
--- Comment #1 from Mark Thomasma...@apache.org2009-03-06
07:23:59 PST ---
This is configurable and has been discussed several times
On 06.03.2009 13:32, Mladen Turk wrote:
For the rest it's simply too much to cope in a single email ;)
I put the force recovery fix and the else suggestion in a patch at:
http://people.apache.org/~rjung/mod_jk-dev/patches/local_states.patch
Everything apart from Hunk number 3 and the small
On 07.03.2009 08:18, mt...@apache.org wrote:
Author: mturk
Date: Sat Mar 7 07:18:08 2009
New Revision: 751213
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=751213view=rev
Log:
Retun protocol error from ajp get message.
This allows to make difference weather we got something from the server or the
On 07.03.2009 09:00, mt...@apache.org wrote:
Author: mturk
Date: Sat Mar 7 08:00:54 2009
New Revision: 751217
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=751217view=rev
Log:
If the number of the channels in error more then half of the busy channels
mark the worker global status as error
Modified:
On 07.03.2009 15:23, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
On 07.03.2009 09:00, mt...@apache.org wrote:
After 10 seconds or after 60 seconds: I think 60 seconds is pretty
long, but I would accept as a compromise :)
Let's use the recover_wait_time here, or if you still think
this is huge
Hi all,
version 1.2.28 of mod_jk is approaching its release. A code snapshot
(revision 752124) is available at:
http://tomcat.apache.org/dev/dist/tomcat-connectors/jk/source/jk-1.2.28-dev/
Please join us in ensuring the quality of the forthcoming release by
testing this snapshot. The source
Hi Sebb,
On 10.03.2009 21:33, sebb wrote:
On 10/03/2009, Rainer Jungrainer.j...@kippdata.de wrote:
Hi all,
version 1.2.28 of mod_jk is approaching its release. A code snapshot
(revision 752124) is available at:
http://tomcat.apache.org/dev/dist/tomcat-connectors/jk/source/jk-1.2.28-dev/
I plan to tag Tomcat Connectors 1.2.28 tomorrow after 1pm GMT and call
for the release vote. If there is a need to wait for some last minute
changes or more testing please let me know.
Thanks!
Rainer
-
To unsubscribe,
Hi Henri,
can you please provide some basic information that helps us find the reason:
1) What was the original compiler error that you got, before adding
extern.
2) What is the httpd and jk configuration that was used when the core
happened.
3) What did you have to do to get the core,
On 19.03.2009 16:47, Henri Gomez wrote:
can you please provide some basic information that helps us find the reason:
1) What was the original compiler error that you got, before adding
extern.
With the i5/OS C compiler, all vars defined in a .h are included in
the objects (.o) using this
On 21.03.2009 00:10, Michael B Allen wrote:
Hi All,
What is the status of this issue?
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41263
I am interested in this because NTLMSSP authentication is basically
not possible unless the remote port is accessible and I want people to
be able
On 21.03.2009 13:23, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
I added a comment with a non spec compliant workaround to BZ41263.
We'll seee, whether we can make the AJP Tomcat connectors hack
aware, i.e. allow them to get the remotePort from the REMOTE_PORT env
var when set.
Only if you make
On 21.03.2009 14:12, Mladen Turk wrote:
I should read the entire logic before posting.
I missed it's an env var.
Sorry for the noise ;)
No problem at all. Better safe than sorry.
I just committed a change to TC trunk and backport proposals to pick up
the REMOTE_PORT env var for
On 21.03.2009 20:09, Michael B Allen wrote:
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 9:27 AM, Rainer Jungrainer.j...@kippdata.de wrote:
On 21.03.2009 14:12, Mladen Turk wrote:
I should read the entire logic before posting.
I missed it's an env var.
Sorry for the noise ;)
No problem at all. Better safe than
Hello to the Tomcat team,
JK 1.2.28 has been available for testing for two weeks as svn
snapshots. Some minor bugs have been found and fixed. So I would like
to proceed with the release vote.
If you want to take a look, the final source distribution can be
downloaded from:
Hi Mladen,
On 22.03.2009 10:19, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
On 21.03.2009 14:12, Mladen Turk wrote:
I just committed a change to TC trunk and backport proposals to pick
up the REMOTE_PORT env var for request.getRemotePort().
So we might think about forwarding REMOTE_PORT by default
Windows Bins (provided by Mladen) are now in place.
Be careful: as long as the daily remove job hasn't run, there are now
1.2.28-dev bins and 1.2.28 bins in parallel directories. Don't use the
1.2.28-dev bins, they'll be gone sometime tomorrow morning.
Regards,
Rainer
Others might have better ideas, but as mentioned in the previous thread,
you can forward the remote port with
JkEnvVar REMOTE_PORT
and retrieve it in Tomcat with
request.getAttribute(REMOTE_PORT)
Doesn't that work?
Regards,
Rainer
On 23.03.2009 02:43, Michael B Allen wrote:
Hi Again,
In
On 23.03.2009 19:31, Mladen Turk wrote:
rj...@apache.org wrote:
Author: rjung
Date: Mon Mar 23 17:54:41 2009
New Revision: 757470
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=757470view=rev
Log:
Set remote port for AJP connectors from the optional request
attribute AJP_REMOTE_PORT.
Backport of
On 24.03.2009 09:52, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
On 23.03.2009 19:31, Mladen Turk wrote:
I read the remote_addr as a string that can recreate
the FULL remote address on the container side.
We need to change JK and TC in a way, that old versions of each work
together compatibly
Hello,
I'm thinking about branching JK, so adding
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomcat/connectors/branches/jk1.2.x
and initially populate the branch with the contents of the 1.2.28 tag.
The motivation is to stabilize 1.2 and restrict further changes on 1.2
to patches only.
If we agree on
Hello Henri,
On 24.03.2009 15:15, Henri Gomez wrote:
Well a jk3 is a good idea but :
- What new features will be included ? I take a look at mod_cluster
and it seems very promising.
- Why not move jk(3) to Apache HTTPD core, like mod_proxy / mod_ajp ?
If you look at my message, my favourite
On 24.03.2009 15:20, r...@apache.org wrote:
Author: remm
Date: Tue Mar 24 14:20:44 2009
New Revision: 757818
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=757818view=rev
Log:
- Votes.
Modified:
tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk/STATUS.txt
Modified: tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk/STATUS.txt
URL:
On 24.03.2009 15:20, r...@apache.org wrote:
+ From what I know, nobody uses these two connectors in Tomcat, so it did
not seem
+ port worthy to me.
I'm confused now. The original patch backport proposal for the other
connectors contains the following comment made by you:
0: remm
On 24.03.2009 16:13, Henri Gomez wrote:
Why not moving into mod_proxy? If httpd were approaching a major version
change (e.g. httpd 3.0), then there would be the freedom of doing big
changes to mod_proxy. But httpd is moving towards 2.4. That means the
architecture of mod_proxy will not change.
On 24.03.2009 15:40, Remy Maucherat wrote:
On Tue, 2009-03-24 at 15:24 +0100, Rainer Jung wrote:
So (and now I am talking about me personally) I think I can still add
interesting features to a mod_jk 1.3 with not to much effort, whereas
the barrior of porting existing mod_jk features
On 24.03.2009 16:29, Costin Manolache wrote:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 8:13 AM, Henri Gomezhenri.go...@gmail.com wrote:
Why not moving into mod_proxy? If httpd were approaching a major version
change (e.g. httpd 3.0), then there would be the freedom of doing big
changes to mod_proxy. But httpd
On 25.03.2009 18:38, Costin Manolache wrote:
This thread was more about where to implement new features - if the goal is
a 'redesign
from scratch' than maybe sandbox or a branch is a better place, but we tried
that twice
(jk2 and webapp) and I don't think there are enough people interested in
On 25.03.2009 17:13, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
If there's a desire to move ahead with a new connector at the tomcat
project, and the branch/release approach is planned to yield stable
code that will improve from release to release, why even retain the
association to 'jk'? It seems it would
On 25.03.2009 20:31, dmitriz wrote:
I would like to front Tomcat 6.0.14 with Sun WebServer 6.1 SP8. I have
followed to a tee the instructions from
http://tomcat.apache.org/connectors-doc/webserver_howto/nes.html
http://tomcat.apache.org/connectors-doc/webserver_howto/nes.html
Unfortunately, it
On 25.03.2009 19:33, Costin Manolache wrote:
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 11:17 AM, Rainer Jungrainer.j...@kippdata.dewrote:
Thanks Costin for coming back to this topic. Collecting ideas for major
redesigns could be done, but that was not my intention. I don't see enough
time available for doing the
On 27.03.2009 01:21, Michael B Allen wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Michael B Alleniop...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 3:41 AM, Rainer Jungrainer.j...@kippdata.de wrote:
Others might have better ideas, but as mentioned in the previous thread, you
can forward the remote
Hi Rémy,
On 27.03.2009 16:48, r...@apache.org wrote:
@@ -152,7 +144,7 @@
This is not for invalidation, only for displaying
idle times and making persistance decisions.
+1: rjung, markt
- -1:
+ -1: remm: no for TC 6.0
You think it's too risky w.r.t. the 6.0 stability, or do
Rainer Jung schrieb:
Apache Tomcat Connectors 1.2.28 is:
[X] Stable - no major issues, no regressions
[ ] Beta - at least one significant issue -- tell us what it is
[ ] Alpha - multiple significant issues -- tell us what they are
Closing this vote with my own.
The result is:
4 votes +1
Please ignore.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
The Apache Tomcat team is pleased to announce the immediate availability
of version 1.2.28 of the Apache Tomcat Connectors.
It contains connectors, which allow a web server such as the Apache HTTP
Server, Microsoft IIS and Sun Web Server to act as a front end to the
Tomcat web application
On 29.03.2009 19:02, sebb wrote:
On 29/03/2009, rj...@apache.orgrj...@apache.org wrote:
Author: rjung
Date: Sun Mar 29 14:17:16 2009
New Revision: 759694
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=759694view=rev
Log:
Fix locking in FastAsyncSocketSender:
Locking in DataSender and the
Peter Rossbach wrote:
Yes, thing a real refactoring must start at ManagerBase. Then we get a
better interface for easier subclassing Manager like DeltaManager at
existing cluster and ha modules and other implementation like JBoss.
I thing we have now some options:
a) Refactoring at tomcat
Apache Tomcat v5.5.17 is:
[X] Stable - no major issues
Tested with Java 1.6.0-beta2-b72 under Solaris 10 with a simple 2 node
cluster in fastasync mode.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands,
What about commented out entries for the admin and manager roles and
resp. users and password set to changeme?
Peter Rossbach wrote:
Yes, defaults are very fine, but secret parameter need active user
interaction.
also -1
Peter
Am 28.04.2006 um 11:54 schrieb Remy Maucherat:
Mladen
I'm wondering if we should split the (possibly huge) char arrays in
BodyContentImpl into smaller chunks of char arrays. Each chunk will be
able to grow big enough to handle the usual cases efficiently (e.g.
64KB). Whenever a bigger size is needed we allocate more of these chunks
from a pool.
Hi,
Remy started a thread talking about source tree reorg. It soon turned
into a discussion about various integration questions.
I would be interested in discussing a couple of questions concerning TC
6, most of them already came up during the last week. I hope it's not to
much shortly
Lists wrote:
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
I'm wondering if we should split the (possibly huge) char arrays in
BodyContentImpl into smaller chunks of char arrays. Each chunk will
be able to grow big enough to handle the usual cases efficiently
(e.g. 64KB). Whenever a bigger size
So people think it TC 6 should be focused on JEE 5 compatibility and
other major changes should only be done, if they pose no risk on an
early date. Somehow we are to late in the J2EE time frame.
On the other hand, major changes to e.g. the configuration management
should not be done for a
Thanks! Finally I managed enable submit messages from my asf account to
tomcat-dev without subscribing to the list from my asf account ;)
More to come.
Peter Rossbach wrote:
Welcome at board!
Peter
Am 12.05.2006 um 19:59 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Author: rjung
Date: Fri May 12 10:59:50
-- Resent, because of mail setup problems during original commit --
Author: rjung
Date: Wed May 10 01:12:29 2006
New Revision: 405672
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=405672view=rev
Log:
Remove unnecessary includes.
Small first commit to also test eol style etc.
Modified:
-- Resent, because of mail setup problems during original commit --
Author: rjung
Date: Wed May 10 01:41:48 2006
New Revision: 405677
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=405677view=rev
Log:
Replace hard coded size of magic header by macro.
Compute size of shm using sizeof.
Modified:
. What kind of timeframe are we looking at?
cheers,
David
|-+
| | Rainer Jung |
| | [EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| | |
| ||
| | 05/16/2006 02
It's a feature:
- disabled and stop attributes only work, when a worker is a balanced
worker of an lb
- if an lb has only one balanced worker, then disabled is not being
respected, because then every request would result in an error. Only if
you set the only worker to stop, it will get no
Mladen Turk wants to add some small changes. After that we will do some
testing again and then release. Any input from your side about
intermediate test results on trunk will be highly appreciated.
Most important changes until now:
- fixed bug, that disabled workers never will leave error
+1
Rainer
Mark Thomas wrote:
That's 2 +1's and a +0. Any committer care to chip in with another +1
so I can go ahead with the beta release?
Cheers,
Mark
Peter Rossbach wrote:
[x ] +1 I am in favour of a 4.1.32-beta release
Great job :-)
peter
As there is no developer documentation: what are you trying to achieve?
mod_jk.c is the file that contains the apache specific code. To
understand it you will need to have some knowledge of the apache module API.
All web server plugins use shared code contained in the directory common.
Hi Mladen,
Costins README.txt inside the sandbox already suggested:
===
Sandbox components should be developed in a sub-directory of the /tomcat/sandbox
directory. Developers may choose whether to add source directly under the
component's directory or to create the standard subversion /trunk/,
I should have been more explicit: +1 for cleaning it up according to the
README :)
Mladen Turk schrieb:
Rainer Jung wrote:
Hi Mladen,
Costins README.txt inside the sandbox already suggested:
I know, I read the README, but the content inside does
not follow the README. That's the point
401 - 500 of 1999 matches
Mail list logo
