+---+
| Bugzilla Bug ID |
| +-+
| | Status: UNC=Unconfirmed NEW=New ASS=Assigned
+---+
| Bugzilla Bug ID |
| +-+
| | Status: UNC=Unconfirmed NEW=New ASS=Assigned
Glenn wrote:
Should the filters mentioned above use apr_brigade_cleanup() instead?
e.g. what happens if a handler uses ap_brigade_pass() to pass a brigade
to a filter, say mod_ext_filter, and then calls apr_brigade_cleanup()
and reuses the brigade? The brigade will already have been destroyed
by
On Sun, Nov 23, 2003 at 11:09:47AM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Glenn wrote:
Should the filters mentioned above use apr_brigade_cleanup() instead?
e.g. what happens if a handler uses ap_brigade_pass() to pass a brigade
to a filter, say mod_ext_filter, and then calls apr_brigade_cleanup()
and
Glenn wrote:
On Sun, Nov 23, 2003 at 11:09:47AM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Glenn wrote:
Does that mean that it is incorrect to call apr_brigade_destroy() on
a brigade that you have passed? There are a number of places in the
code that do this.
yes; where is that code?
What is the benefit of a
Indeed, I can see why it was designed this way however I think that it should be up to
the admin to ensure that there is no cyclic symlinks. I don't think that some one
should have to patch the code to use a CDSL in the Include Directive. Anyway here is a
patch up to you guys if you want to
What testing gets performed prior to an official httpd 2.x release? I
think whatever test suite is used, needs some updating to include
configurations that utilize more features like user tracking, caching
and multi-views. The last release (2.0.48) crashes on startup for my
configuration
On Sun, 23 Nov 2003, Robert La Ferla wrote:
What testing gets performed prior to an official httpd 2.x release? I
think whatever test suite is used, needs some updating to include
configurations that utilize more features like user tracking, caching
and multi-views. The last release
I hope the response does not diminish your enthusiasm...
The [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list (you can join up with a mail
to [EMAIL PROTECTED]) maintains the mod_specweb and
the perl-framework websites. I believe that flood is seperate at this point.
Please - subscribe and contribute! The
I have no problem with running release candidates and contributing. I
have contributed in the past by the way... In fact, I wouldn't object
to trying nightly or weekly builds. The problem is that I don't see
those as easily available from the httpd.apache.org website. There is a
link to
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003, Robert La Ferla wrote:
link to the latest source tree but the source code there does not have a
configure script. Yes, I can build the script (autoconf?) but if you
want people to test software on a regular basis, it would be better to
have a ready to go source release
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003, Robert La Ferla wrote:
In the interim, it would be nice to see some mention of a workaround on
the site for users.
Done. Let me know if you think that there are more details I could add
that would be helpful.
--Cliff
12 matches
Mail list logo
