Re: mod_proxy_uwsgi build errors

2017-12-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
We use uint8_t numerous places elsewhere. > On Dec 13, 2017, at 9:44 AM, Steffen wrote: > > > @jim > > You adjusted uint16_t > > Still errors: > > > mod_proxy_uwsgi.c(186): warning C4267: '=': conversion from 'size_t' to > 'apr_uint16_t', possible loss of data >

Re: mod_proxy_uwsgi build errors

2017-12-13 Thread Steffen
I know, for example: util_expr_scan.c mod_brotli.c h2_filter.c h2_proxy_session.c h2_proxy_util.c h2_session.c h2_stream.c h2_stream.h h2_util.c h2_util.h But there no errors, they building fine. On Wednesday 13/12/2017 at 16:23, Jim Jagielski wrote: We use uint8_t numerous places

Re: 2.4.x STATUS needs you!

2017-12-13 Thread William A Rowe Jr
I tend to agree that proxy, being a 'lower level' protocol, aught to represent before remoteip presents itself. Overloading the module seemed like a headache. That said, as the author of remoteip, I consider my opinions highly biased and untrusted by me myself, so you all sort that out :) Thanks

Re: 2.4.x STATUS needs you!

2017-12-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
Hmmm https://lists.apache.org/list.html?c...@httpd.apache.org:lte=24M:proxyprotocol Note when 1st committed. > On Dec 13, 2017, at 7:19 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > On Wed, Dec

Re: 2.4.x STATUS needs you!

2017-12-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
I was wrong about OtherBill suggesting it be in mod_remoteip... it was actually Daniel: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b79ff329bb6163bb63d1284696360385313a402a6a70604459604e48@%3Cdev.httpd.apache.org%3E

Re: mod_md 1.1.0 repeating on error

2017-12-13 Thread Steffen
Luca says: executing scripts in response to an event I hope you are aware of the MDNotifyCmd, which is executing a script on the event that a renew is OK. I am not a coder: for me looks it not that difficult to make an Else statement when it is NOT_OK. To notify on error is

Re: 2.4.x STATUS needs you!

2017-12-13 Thread William A Rowe Jr
On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 6:19 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 6:17 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >> On Dec 13, 2017, at 1:02 AM, Jordan Gigov wrote: >> >> On 12 December 2017 at 11:32, Stefan Eissing

Re: mod_md and ManagedDomain

2017-12-13 Thread Steffen
Stefan wrote: /Code request for a Windows Service restart call: 0/ I started some time ago a discussion at: https://github.com/icing/mod_md/issues/17 There I want it as an option for Windows. The discussion resulted in the MDNotifyCmd which makes me very happy, a script can now do the job

Re: 2.4.x STATUS needs you!

2017-12-13 Thread William A Rowe Jr
On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 6:17 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > On Dec 13, 2017, at 1:02 AM, Jordan Gigov wrote: > > On 12 December 2017 at 11:32, Stefan Eissing > wrote: >> >> Fellow Apache developers: if we want to make an X-mas

Re: 2.4.x STATUS needs you!

2017-12-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Dec 13, 2017, at 12:45 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Stefan Eissing > wrote: >> Fellow Apache developers: if we want to make an X-mas 2.4 release for the >> people on this planet, the backports in

Re: 2.4.x STATUS needs you!

2017-12-13 Thread William A Rowe Jr
On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 6:26 AM, Graham Leggett wrote: > On 13 Dec 2017, at 2:22 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > >> Or, it is bad form to introduce features and then force some >> config-changes on users after the 'experimental' phase, which >> isn't even

mod_md 1.1.0 build warnings

2017-12-13 Thread Steffen
Not serious (I think): mod_md.c(285): warning C4003: not enough actual parameters for macro 'APLOGNO' mod_md.c(307): warning C4003: not enough actual parameters for macro 'APLOGNO' mod_md.c(784): warning C4003: not enough actual parameters for macro 'APLOGNO' mod_md.c(827): warning C4003:

Re: mod_md 1.1.0 repeating on error

2017-12-13 Thread Luca Toscano
Hi Steffen, 2017-12-12 19:20 GMT+01:00 Steffen : > > > Your advise is that I stop testing/ helping ? Please answer this question. > If yes, then I have to remove the test mod_md download from Apache Lounge > and cannot give anymore support there to the users I represent.

Re: 2.4.x STATUS needs you!

2017-12-13 Thread Daniel Ruggeri
Aye, I had originally added the support for PROXY in remoteip since... well... it's used to extract remote IP info. The funny part is that I had committed my additions within an hour of the third party code being donated and incorporated without realizing it... so I removed my changes and added

Re: mod_md, le rename Evgeniy and Ameet

2017-12-13 Thread Suneet Shah
Hi Evgeniy Can you help Stefan work part this issue? Thanks a lot On Dec 13, 2017 11:38 AM, "Stefan Eissing" wrote: To all early adopters of mod_md: I just found out that my config rename in v1.1.0 is not backward compatible for several, valid configurations. If

mod_md, le rename

2017-12-13 Thread Stefan Eissing
To all early adopters of mod_md: I just found out that my config rename in v1.1.0 is not backward compatible for several, valid configurations. If you deplay the new version (or get it now via PPAs), you most likely need to rename "

Re: 2.4.x STATUS needs you!

2017-12-13 Thread William A Rowe Jr
On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 6:19 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > > Personally, I think it is bad form to hold off on a back port > for a feature that only 1 person really, really "demanded" > and then not do anything to add that functionality in. > > So I say YES, we SHOULD vote on

Re: mod_proxy_uwsgi build errors

2017-12-13 Thread William A Rowe Jr
C99 is promiscuous. I thought we were holding to C89 on the 2.4 branch? On Dec 13, 2017 09:23, "Jim Jagielski" wrote: > We use uint8_t numerous places elsewhere. > > > On Dec 13, 2017, at 9:44 AM, Steffen wrote: > > > > > > @jim > > > > You adjusted

Re: mod_proxy_uwsgi build errors

2017-12-13 Thread Ruediger Pluem
On 12/13/2017 04:27 PM, Steffen wrote: > I know, for example: > > util_expr_scan.c At least this one includes inttypes.h which seems according to the comments is only available on C99. Should we create an apr_uint8_t in apr and / or simply use apr_uint16_t in the uint8_t cases? >

Re: 2.4.x STATUS needs you!

2017-12-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
> On Dec 13, 2017, at 1:02 AM, Jordan Gigov wrote: > > On 12 December 2017 at 11:32, Stefan Eissing > wrote: > Fellow Apache developers: if we want to make an X-mas 2.4 release for the > people on this

Re: 2.4.x STATUS needs you!

2017-12-13 Thread Graham Leggett
On 13 Dec 2017, at 2:22 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > Or, it is bad form to introduce features and then force some > config-changes on users after the 'experimental' phase, which > isn't even proposed, in this case. > > We want to be pretty strict about config changes, and

mod_proxy_uwsgi build errors

2017-12-13 Thread Steffen
Trying to build on Win mod_proxy_uwsgi from trunk. Get the follwoing: mod_proxy_uwsgi.c(139): error C2065: 'uint16_t': undeclared identifier mod_proxy_uwsgi.c(139): error C2146: syntax error: missing ';' before identifier 'pktsize' mod_proxy_uwsgi.c(139): error C2065: 'pktsize': undeclared

Re: mod_proxy_uwsgi build errors

2017-12-13 Thread Steffen
@jim You adjusted uint16_t Still errors: mod_proxy_uwsgi.c(186): warning C4267: '=': conversion from 'size_t' to 'apr_uint16_t', possible loss of data mod_proxy_uwsgi.c(187): error C2065: 'uint8_t': undeclared identifier mod_proxy_uwsgi.c(187): error C2064: term does not evaluate to a

Re: mod_md 1.1.0 build warnings

2017-12-13 Thread Steffen
Is fixed with Revision 1818031 On Wednesday 13/12/2017 at 13:46, Steffen wrote: Not serious (I think): mod_md.c(285): warning C4003: not enough actual parameters for macro 'APLOGNO' mod_md.c(307): warning C4003: not enough actual parameters for macro 'APLOGNO' mod_md.c(784): warning