Re: dev Digest 28 Jul 2004 11:27:07 -0000 Issue 1561

Joshua Slive [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 27 Jul 2004, Dan Wilga wrote: [Fri Jul 02 11:14:30 2004] [info] Initial (No.1) HTTPS request received for child 0 (server [server name]:443) [Fri Jul 02 11:14:30 2004] [info] (104)Connection reset by peer: core_output_filter: writing data to

Re: Connection reset by peer errors in 2.0.50

[Let's try this again, with the right subject line. Please disregard the previous post. Sigh. Sometimes I'm amazed I remember how to get up in the morning.] Joshua Slive [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 27 Jul 2004, Dan Wilga wrote: [Fri Jul 02 11:14:30 2004] [info] Initial (No.1) HTTPS

hey

i don't think so. Norton AntiVirus excluído1.txt Description: plain/text

using APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS

hi all I was just in garrett's APR talk here at oscon and he was mentioning the APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS macro, which I found interesting since httpd only uses it in a few places, opting for a direct comparison to APR_SUCCESS instead. should we move to APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS in all places? can

A question about Apache testing

Dear all, I'm doing a study in open source software development. I've a question about Aapche testing. Where can I find the test cases you developers are using in testing the whole system before you make an official release? What kind of testing techniques you are using? Who is responsible for

Re: using APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS

Geoffrey Young wrote: hi all I was just in garrett's APR talk here at oscon and he was mentioning the APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS macro, which I found interesting since httpd only uses it in a few places, opting for a direct comparison to APR_SUCCESS instead. should we move to APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS in

Re: using APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS

cross-posted to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Garrett Rooney wrote: Geoffrey Young wrote: hi all I was just in garrett's APR talk here at oscon and he was mentioning the APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS macro, which I found interesting since httpd only uses it in a few places, opting for a direct comparison to

Re: using APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS

The initial thought was you might have LDAP success, OS status success, and possibly multiple return codes that were considered successes. Nothing was ever done with this. Bill At 02:40 PM 7/28/2004, Garrett Rooney wrote: Geoffrey Young wrote: hi all I was just in garrett's APR talk here at

Re: using APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS

William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: The initial thought was you might have LDAP success, OS status success, and possibly multiple return codes that were considered successes. Nothing was ever done with this. What about the win32 definition of the macro: #define APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS(s) ((s) ==

Re: A question about Apache testing

Yaqian Shen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [...] Where can I find the test cases you developers are using in testing the whole system before you make an official release? httpd-test? http://httpd.apache.org/test/ -- Joe Schaefer

Re: using APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS

On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 08:08:05PM -0400, Ryan Bloom wrote: Basically, the macro is wrong and needs to be removed. The contract that _all_ APR API's live up to is that on a successful result, they must return APR_SUCCESS. The reason we chose to use 0 as success is simple: Yup. The contract

Re: using APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS

Greg Stein wrote: On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 08:08:05PM -0400, Ryan Bloom wrote: Basically, the macro is wrong and needs to be removed. The contract that _all_ APR API's live up to is that on a successful result, they must return APR_SUCCESS. The reason we chose to use 0 as success is simple: Yup.

Re: using APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS

Basically, the macro is wrong and needs to be removed. The contract that _all_ APR API's live up to is that on a successful result, they must return APR_SUCCESS. The reason we chose to use 0 as success is simple: 1) Most platforms can check for equality with 0 faster than they can check for

[STATUS] (apache-1.3) Wed Jul 28 23:45:11 EDT 2004

APACHE 1.3 STATUS: -*-text-*- Last modified at [$Date: 2004/05/20 15:16:42 $] Release: 1.3.32-dev: In development 1.3.31: Tagged May 7, 2004. Announced May 11, 2004. 1.3.30: Tagged April 9, 2004. Not released. 1.3.29: Tagged October 24,

[STATUS] (httpd-2.0) Wed Jul 28 23:45:16 EDT 2004

APACHE 2.0 STATUS: -*-text-*- Last modified at [$Date: 2004/07/28 23:17:16 $] Release: 2.0.51 : in development 2.0.50 : released June 30, 2004 as GA. 2.0.49 : released March 19, 2004 as GA. 2.0.48 : released October 29, 2003 as GA.

[STATUS] (httpd-2.1) Wed Jul 28 23:45:19 EDT 2004

APACHE 2.1 STATUS: -*-text-*- Last modified at [$Date: 2004/04/27 22:09:17 $] Release [NOTE that only Alpha/Beta releases occur in 2.1 development]: 2.1.0 : in development Please consult the following STATUS files for information on related

Re: cookie_jar ignored with requests_redirectable = 1

David? Boris Zentner wrote: Hi, recently I try to use Apache::Test with HTTP::Cookies. But it did not work as expected. I suppose the way to add a cookie_jar to A::T was with 'Apache::TestRequest::user_agent'. I read the docs from Apache::TestRequest::user_agent. Here is the relevant part of

Re: [Patch] add TEST_EXTRA_ARGS to allow passing arguments to t/TEST thru make invocation

Geoffrey Young wrote: ping :) Must have fell off my radar. How is the following patch ? --Geoff Stas Bekman wrote: Geoffrey Young wrote: I'm not sure about the name choice. $(TEST_VERBOSE) and $(TEST_FILES) are the same as other Test packages use. Do they have $TEST_EXTRA_ARGS too?

Re: [Patch] add TEST_EXTRA_ARGS to allow passing arguments to t/TEST thru make invocation

Philippe M. Chiasson wrote: Geoffrey Young wrote: ping :) Must have fell off my radar. How is the following patch ? +1 --Geoff