> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Graham Leggett
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 10. Oktober 2018 19:12
> An: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: svn commit: r1834924 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
>
> On 28 Aug 2018, at 12:17, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
>
> >> On 07/20/2018 02:49 PM, Yann Yl
Thanks, Yann and Jim for the quick review and vote!
> Am 10.10.2018 um 17:34 schrieb j...@apache.org:
>
> Author: jim
> Date: Wed Oct 10 15:34:19 2018
> New Revision: 1843464
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1843464&view=rev
> Log:
> backport votes
>
>
> Modified:
>httpd/httpd/bra
Anyone else seeing
t/modules/buffer.t(Wstat: 0 Tests: 12 Failed: 2)
Failed tests: 8, 12
?
I don't see this with trunk on the same machine. Issue seems to be if input
filtering is on on large POSTs.
Regards
Rüdiger
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Daniel Ruggeri
My view:
Shipping the TLSv1.3 support has risks, but we also need to
enable people to have the latest in transport security.
We paid attention to keeping the behaviour with older versions
of openssl unchanged and our test cases confirm that this is the
case - as far or short as they go.
Peopl
> Am 10.10.2018 um 21:30 schrieb Jim Jagielski :
>
>
>
>> On Oct 10, 2018, at 10:04 AM, Stefan Eissing
>> wrote:
>> I have started to convert the existing h2 testsuite in
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/test/mod_h2/trunk from shell scripts
>> to pytest in the github repro. I hav
+1
* macOS 10.14.0, XCode 10, OpenSSL 1.0.2: mod_http2, mod_md tests pass
* macOS 10.14.0, XCode 10, OpenSSL 1.1.1: mod_http2, mod_md tests pass
* ubuntu 18.04 LTS, gcc 7.3.0, openssl 1.1.0g: mod_http2 tests pass
> Am 10.10.2018 um 21:18 schrieb Daniel Ruggeri :
>
> Hi, all;
> Please find
% autoconf
configure.ac:41: error: possibly undefined macro: AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE
If this token and others are legitimate, please use m4_pattern_allow.
See the Autoconf documentation.
% ls
AUTHORS DISCUSS Makefile.am README.md
configure*mod-h2.xcod
I suggest you add
'autoreconf -i'
as a prelim step.
Sry, forgot that in my mail. It's described in "build from git" in the
README.md, my mistake.
> Am 11.10.2018 um 12:42 schrieb Jim Jagielski :
>
> I suggest you add
>
> 'autoreconf -i'
>
> as a prelim step.
Gotcha. Thx.
Waouh!
This would mean I've provided a new useful test!
(it has been added recently in r1841508)
:)
I definitely need to document how to generate and use test-coverage data when
running the test framework.
This helps to spot where new tests are needed.
CJ
> Message du 1
Do you know if the failure is a regression over 2.4.35?
Regards
Rüdiger
Von: Marion et Christophe JAILLET
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 11. Oktober 2018 13:13
An: dev@httpd.apache.org
Betreff: re: AW: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.36
Waouh!
This would mean I've provided a new useful test!
(it has been
BTW, and I'm sure you know this, that this fails w/ trunk:
% make
Making all in mod_http2
CC mod_http2_la-h2_alt_svc.lo
CC mod_http2_la-h2_bucket_beam.lo
CC mod_http2_la-h2_bucket_eos.lo
CC mod_http2_la-h2_config.lo
CC mod_http2_la-h2_conn.lo
h2_conn.c:311:8
That is a change in trunk which has not been ported to our 2.4.x branch. Since
the github mod_http2 is intended for people who place the module into their
2.4.x server, I did not add a mpm version check for this - yet.
> Am 11.10.2018 um 13:17 schrieb Jim Jagielski :
>
> BTW, and I'm sure yo
No, I don't know and won't be able to check before tomorrow evening.
I would say that these tests were passing with 2.4.x when it was added (~3
weeks ago), so it could be a regression.
But it needs to be checked to be sure about it.
Nothing obvious in the recent commits look related to a
Just pushed a fix to github.
> Am 11.10.2018 um 13:21 schrieb Stefan Eissing :
>
> That is a change in trunk which has not been ported to our 2.4.x branch.
> Since the github mod_http2 is intended for people who place the module into
> their 2.4.x server, I did not add a mpm version check for
FWIW, on macOS, both trunk and httpd-2.4 fail on this test:
t/modules/buffer.t .. 3/12 # Failed test 4 in
t/modules/buffer.t at line 32
t/modules/buffer.t .. 7/12 # Failed test 8 in
t/modules/buffer.t at line 32 fail #2
t/modules/buffer.t ..
Oh, and it's not a regression since, at least, 2.4.34 (at least for me)
> On Oct 11, 2018, at 7:35 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> FWIW, on macOS, both trunk and httpd-2.4 fail on this test:
>
> t/modules/buffer.t .. 3/12 # Failed test 4 in
> t/modules/buffer.t at line 32
> t/mo
On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 02:18:45PM -0500, Daniel Ruggeri wrote:
> Hi, all;
>Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
>
> I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release this candidate
> tarball as 2.4.36:
> [x]
No issue on my Ubuntu 18.04 VM.
On what configuration are you running your tests, Rüdiger? macOS, just
like Jim?
CJ
Le 11/10/2018 à 13:35, Jim Jagielski a écrit :
FWIW, on macOS, both trunk and httpd-2.4 fail on this test:
t/modules/buffer.t .. 3/12 # Failed test 4 in
t/
On 10/11/2018 08:10 PM, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> No issue on my Ubuntu 18.04 VM.
>
> On what configuration are you running your tests, Rüdiger? macOS, just like
> Jim?
Centos 7.5 64 Bit
Regards
Rüdiger
>
> CJ
>
> Le 11/10/2018 à 13:35, Jim Jagielski a écrit :
>> FWIW, on macOS, both t
Le 10/10/2018 à 21:18, Daniel Ruggeri a écrit :
Hi, all;
Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release this
candidate tarball as 2.4.36:
[X] +1: It's not just good, i
22 matches
Mail list logo
