Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ will soon (within the hour, upon resync) contain the following tarballs for approval httpd-2.2.4.tar.bz2 [.asc|.md5] httpd-2.2.4.tar.gz [.asc|.md5] httpd-2.2.4-win32-src.zip [.asc|.md5] I counted 7+1, 0-1. Thanks everyone.
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
re: the Windows 2000 0.0.0.0 IP address problem Bill, Both solutions work. Applying win32sock_is_known.patch corrects the problem for win2000. The Win32DisableAcceptEx directive also works to correct the problem (without the patch). -tom- William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: It's actually apr_os_sock_make() and although it set unknown=1 where there was no remote addr, it assumed unknown from alloc_socket() was 0. Try the attached patch please? Bill William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Tom, speculating here without a 2000 box close - would you try to DisableWin32AcceptEx please? Perhaps the flaw actually resides in how AcceptEx and GetAcceptExSockaddrs, and how they interact with the socket? Bill
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
Tom Donovan wrote: re: the Windows 2000 0.0.0.0 IP address problem Bill, Both solutions work. The Win32DisableAcceptEx directive also works to correct the problem (without the patch). That's your bug - AcceptEx inhibits proper behavior of getpeername(), if you would like to start an incident at Microsoft with respect to your 2000 machine's IP stack and drivers. Applying win32sock_is_known.patch corrects the problem for win2000. Is our bug, fixing on all apr applicable branches today, thanks for all of your detailed analysis and dedicated testing! I don't see this as a showstopper, as there is a user-configurable workaround (Win32DisableAcceptEx) if the client in server-status, and the access.log/error.log entries displays as 0.0.0.0. Bill
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
re: start an incident at Microsoft I'll try - but since Win2000 is in what MS calls Extended support phase, only security bugs are accepted. I'll describe it as creatively as I can... re: I don't see this as a showstopper True. The Win32DisableAcceptEx directive certainly works. There could be a large number of production sites running Win2k, so there is apt to be a lot of buzz and forum posts about you need to add this new directive for 2.2.4. I'd vote to fix it in 2.2.4 rather than deal with the noise - but personally I'm happy either way since I now know the workaround. Glad I could contribute to an Apache release. -tom- William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: The Win32DisableAcceptEx directive also works to correct the problem (without the patch). That's your bug - AcceptEx inhibits proper behavior of getpeername(), if you would like to start an incident at Microsoft with respect to your 2000 machine's IP stack and drivers. Applying win32sock_is_known.patch corrects the problem for win2000. Is our bug, fixing on all apr applicable branches today, thanks for all of your detailed analysis and dedicated testing! I don't see this as a showstopper, as there is a user-configurable workaround (Win32DisableAcceptEx) if the client in server-status, and the access.log/error.log entries displays as 0.0.0.0. Bill
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
Tom Donovan wrote: I'd vote to fix it in 2.2.4 rather than deal with the noise - but personally I'm happy either way since I now know the workaround. We won't - 2.2.4 is done. We could scuttle 2.2.4, but given the overwhelming improvements I'm really loathe to do that. Let 2.2.4 live, and pick up 2.2.5 soon. We can't help it when MS doesn't follow their own documented API /shrug
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Tom Donovan wrote: I'd vote to fix it in 2.2.4 rather than deal with the noise - but personally I'm happy either way since I now know the workaround. We won't - 2.2.4 is done. We could scuttle 2.2.4, but given the overwhelming improvements I'm really loathe to do that. Let 2.2.4 live, and pick up 2.2.5 soon. I'm looking at a 2.2.5 likely the end of Jan/start of Feb... -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball.
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
On Jan 6, 2007, at 2:41 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ will soon (within the hour, upon resync) contain the following tarballs for approval httpd-2.2.4.tar.bz2 [.asc|.md5] httpd-2.2.4.tar.gz [.asc|.md5] httpd-2.2.4-win32-src.zip [.asc|.md5] +/-1 [ ] Release httpd 2.2.4 Let the voting begin, and kick off 2.2.5 efforts. I understand Jim is still interested in RM'ing 2.2.5 later this month. Tested via Perl test framework, no regressions: OS X 10.4.8 (PPC) Sol 8 SUSE 10.0 FreeBSD 5.5R
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
On 1/6/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [+1] Release httpd 2.2.4 tested with worker MPM on RedHat 4/ia32 and Solaris 10/SPARC32
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
On 1/6/2007 at 12:41 AM, in message [EMAIL PROTECTED], William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ will soon (within the hour, upon resync) contain the following tarballs for approval httpd-2.2.4.tar.bz2 [.asc|.md5] httpd-2.2.4.tar.gz [.asc|.md5] httpd-2.2.4-win32-src.zip [.asc|.md5] +/-1 [ ] Release httpd 2.2.4 Let the voting begin, and kick off 2.2.5 efforts. I understand Jim is still interested in RM'ing 2.2.5 later this month. Bil +1 NetWare Brad
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
I have had some difficulties running 2.2.4 RC on Windows 2000. The remote IP is always seen as 0.0.0.0. Here are a few lines from my logs\access.log: 0.0.0.0 - - [07/Jan/2007:11:22:59 -0500] GET /server-status HTTP/1.1 403 215 0.0.0.0 - - [07/Jan/2007:11:23:36 -0500] GET / HTTP/1.1 200 20417 I built with Microsoft Visual C++ 2005, and again with Visual C++ 6.0. Either set (VC8 or VC6) of binaries runs OK on Windows 2003 and also on Windows XP. The problem only occurs when running 2.2.4 on Win2k. Apache 2.2.3 built with the same compilers runs OK on all three platforms. Has anyone else run 2.2.4 on Windows 2000 yet? -tom- On 1/6/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
Tom, thanks for the analysis and bug report - your trace follows mine but the getpeername was news to me. W.R.T. httpd you made the assumption Windows has the peer name - which is true with AcceptEx but won't be true in any other context. This is the exception not the rule. So a couple thoughts; Win32 apr_os_socket_put is going to need to learn how to set the local/remote addresses as 'identified' for purposes of working within httpd. And the getpeername bug needs a workaround/hack. All in all - very good catch. Bill Tom Donovan wrote: I have had some difficulties running 2.2.4 RC on Windows 2000. The remote IP is always seen as 0.0.0.0. Here are a few lines from my logs\access.log: 0.0.0.0 - - [07/Jan/2007:11:22:59 -0500] GET /server-status HTTP/1.1 403 215 0.0.0.0 - - [07/Jan/2007:11:23:36 -0500] GET / HTTP/1.1 200 20417 I built with Microsoft Visual C++ 2005, and again with Visual C++ 6.0. Either set (VC8 or VC6) of binaries runs OK on Windows 2003 and also on Windows XP. The problem only occurs when running 2.2.4 on Win2k. Apache 2.2.3 built with the same compilers runs OK on all three platforms. Has anyone else run 2.2.4 on Windows 2000 yet? -tom- On 1/6/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: .
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
+1, all sigs verified on Darwin Kernel Version 8.8.0 (10.4.8) powerpc powerpc-apple-darwin8-gcc-4.0.1 (GCC) 4.0.1 (Apple Computer, Inc. build 5367) All tests successful, 23 tests and 14 subtests skipped. Files=65, Tests=2078, 100 wallclock secs (48.33 cusr + 13.37 csys = 61.70 CPU) Roy
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
re: the Windows 2000 0.0.0.0 IP address problem A quick look through win32/sockets.c shows code to fill in remote_addr after accept() and connect(), as well as after acceptEx(). This led me to believe that Windows has the peer name. Ditto for the win9x_*() functions in Apache server/mpm/winnt/child.c. Alas, I don't have any win9x systems to check that this works OK. I see that apr_os_sock_put() set remote_addr_unknown=1 in earlier APR versions too. Apache on Windows only seems to use apr_os_sock_put() to pass listen sockets between parent child in mpm_winnt.c, so perhaps that's why the problem was never noticed. Perhaps it would be simpler to presume that remote_addr *is* always known on Windows, and make sure all the Windows APR socket functions live up to this rule. -tom- William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Tom, thanks for the analysis and bug report - your trace follows mine but the getpeername was news to me. W.R.T. httpd you made the assumption Windows has the peer name - which is true with AcceptEx but won't be true in any other context. This is the exception not the rule. So a couple thoughts; Win32 apr_os_socket_put is going to need to learn how to set the local/remote addresses as 'identified' for purposes of working within httpd. And the getpeername bug needs a workaround/hack.
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
On 6 Jan 2007, at 07:41, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ will soon (within the hour, upon resync) contain the following tarballs for approval httpd-2.2.4.tar.bz2 [.asc|.md5] httpd-2.2.4.tar.gz [.asc|.md5] httpd-2.2.4-win32-src.zip [.asc|.md5] +/-1 [ ] Release httpd 2.2.4 Let the voting begin, and kick off 2.2.5 efforts. I understand Jim is still interested in RM'ing 2.2.5 later this month. Bill +1 linux -0 darwin: segfaults when mod_usertrack is loaded. That's no change on before, but ISTR it's a common problem for mac users, and should be documented. And it would be good if mod_usertrack declined to build on darwin, so this doesn't hit users who have no idea of tracking down a crash. -- Nick Kew
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
Tom Donovan wrote: Perhaps it would be simpler to presume that remote_addr *is* always known on Windows, and make sure all the Windows APR socket functions live up to this rule. Simpler? Sure, if apr is only for httpd when AcceptEx() is in use :-/ Of course, that's not true, the implementation is bogus, we need to toggle this as !remote_addr_unknown in apr_os_sock_put *when appropriate*.
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
Tom, speculating here without a 2000 box close - would you try to DisableWin32AcceptEx please? Perhaps the flaw actually resides in how AcceptEx and GetAcceptExSockaddrs, and how they interact with the socket? Bill Tom Donovan wrote: I have had some difficulties running 2.2.4 RC on Windows 2000. The remote IP is always seen as 0.0.0.0. Here are a few lines from my logs\access.log: 0.0.0.0 - - [07/Jan/2007:11:22:59 -0500] GET /server-status HTTP/1.1 403 215 0.0.0.0 - - [07/Jan/2007:11:23:36 -0500] GET / HTTP/1.1 200 20417
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
Tom Donovan wrote:
I see that apr_os_sock_put() set remote_addr_unknown=1 in earlier APR
versions too.
It's actually apr_os_sock_make() and although it set unknown=1 where there
was no remote addr, it assumed unknown from alloc_socket() was 0.
Try the attached patch please?
Bill
Index: network_io/win32/sockets.c
===
--- network_io/win32/sockets.c (revision 492717)
+++ network_io/win32/sockets.c (working copy)
@@ -451,10 +451,8 @@
(*apr_sock)-remote_addr-pool = cont;
/* XXX IPv6 - this assumes sin_port and sin6_port at same offset */
(*apr_sock)-remote_addr-port = ntohs((*apr_sock)-remote_addr-sa.sin.sin_port);
+(*apr_sock)-remote_addr_unknown = 0;
}
-else {
-(*apr_sock)-remote_addr_unknown = 1;
-}
apr_pool_cleanup_register((*apr_sock)-pool, (void *)(*apr_sock),
socket_cleanup, apr_pool_cleanup_null);
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
Seems to me that the autodetection which used to prevent mod_deflate from building on win32 unless zlib is in the srclib directory is broken. I have a vanilla unzip for the win-src, and it's failing on missing zlib headers... On 1/6/07, *William A. Rowe, Jr.* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ will soon (within the hour, upon resync) contain the following tarballs for approval httpd-2.2.4.tar.bz2 [.asc|.md5] httpd-2.2.4.tar.gz [.asc|.md5] httpd-2.2.4-win32-src.zip [.asc|.md5] +/-1 [ ] Release httpd 2.2.4 Let the voting begin, and kick off 2.2.5 efforts. I understand Jim is still interested in RM'ing 2.2.5 later this month. Bill -- ~Jorge
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
This is a wild guess but Line 82 of makefile.win: !IF EXIST(srclib\zlib) in the win-src packaged the zlib and openssl folders exist without the files being in there. I guess this broke it. On 1/7/07, Issac Goldstand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Seems to me that the autodetection which used to prevent mod_deflate from building on win32 unless zlib is in the srclib directory is broken. I have a vanilla unzip for the win-src, and it's failing on missing zlib headers... On 1/6/07, *William A. Rowe, Jr.* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ will soon (within the hour, upon resync) contain the following tarballs for approval httpd-2.2.4.tar.bz2 [.asc|.md5] httpd-2.2.4.tar.gz [.asc|.md5] httpd-2.2.4-win32-src.zip [.asc|.md5] +/-1 [ ] Release httpd 2.2.4 Let the voting begin, and kick off 2.2.5 efforts. I understand Jim is still interested in RM'ing 2.2.5 later this month. Bill -- ~Jorge -- ~Jorge
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
On 01/07/2007 08:16 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Ruediger Pluem wrote: -0 on SuSE Linux 10.1 x86_64, gcc 4.1.0 Due to the apr-util bug 41308 (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41308) the 64 bit build does not work if a system wide 32 bit expat library is present. Can you clarify - if you specific --with-builtin-expat does the issue persist? No, if you use --with-expat=builtin it does work, which is quite clear as the delivered library source code is then compiled 64 bit. I made further comments inside the PR. If you remove /usr/lib/libexpat.la (no need to remove the .so files!) then everything works fine. I think what is missing in apr-util's detection function is a crosscheck if the libexpat found is really linkable with the current set of CFLAGS. Regards Rüdiger
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
On Jan 5, 2007, at 11:41 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ will soon (within the hour, upon resync) contain the following tarballs for approval httpd-2.2.4.tar.bz2 [.asc|.md5] httpd-2.2.4.tar.gz [.asc|.md5] httpd-2.2.4-win32-src.zip [.asc|.md5] +/-1 [ ] Release httpd 2.2.4 +1 on Darwin/Mac OS X Server 10.4.8 on PowerPC and FreeBSD 6.1 on amd64 Darwin clarus.apache.org. 8.8.0 Darwin Kernel Version 8.8.0: Fri Sep 8 17:18:57 PDT 2006; root:xnu-792.12.6.obj~1/RELEASE_PPC Power Macintosh powerpc 2.2.4-prefork: Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed --- t/ssl/v2.t 11 100.00% 1 3 tests and 2 subtests skipped. Failed 1/76 test scripts, 98.68% okay. 1/2832 subtests failed, 99.96% okay. 2.2.3-prefork: Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed --- t/ssl/v2.t 11 100.00% 1 3 tests and 2 subtests skipped. Failed 1/76 test scripts, 98.68% okay. 1/2832 subtests failed, 99.96% okay. I'd daresay there's something wrong with the Perl SSL glue on this box. Not a regression, not of worry. FreeBSD freebsd6.sandla.org. 6.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE #0: Wed Nov 29 12:51:00 PST 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/ src/sys/SMP amd64 2.2.4-prefork: All tests successful, 3 tests and 2 subtests skipped. 2.2.3-prefork: All tests successful, 3 tests and 2 subtests skipped. No regressions -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.temme.net/sander/ PGP FP: 51B4 8727 466A 0BC3 69F4 B7B8 B2BE BC40 1529 24AF smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
On Jan 5, 2007, at 11:41 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Let the voting begin, and kick off 2.2.5 efforts. I understand Jim is still interested in RM'ing 2.2.5 later this month. The RC has been running on people.apache.org as of 1:46PM today. http://people.apache.org/server-status Nothing untoward in the error log; I'll keep an eye on it. S. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.temme.net/sander/ PGP FP: 51B4 8727 466A 0BC3 69F4 B7B8 B2BE BC40 1529 24AF smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
Doesn't seem to work for me. Compiles without errors just the regular warnings. But when I try to run any of the binaries I get: http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/7573/errorvs2005jp1.jpg I'm using visual studio 2005 as always. Following the same steps I've been doing since 2.2.0 I tried with and without doing cvtdsp.pl -2005 without it won't compile due to rc.exe errors. Jorge On 1/6/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ will soon (within the hour, upon resync) contain the following tarballs for approval httpd-2.2.4.tar.bz2 [.asc|.md5] httpd-2.2.4.tar.gz [.asc|.md5] httpd-2.2.4-win32-src.zip [.asc|.md5] +/-1 [ ] Release httpd 2.2.4 Let the voting begin, and kick off 2.2.5 efforts. I understand Jim is still interested in RM'ing 2.2.5 later this month. Bill -- ~Jorge
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
Builds fine with Visual Studio 2005 Service Pack 1 It is available with SSL at the Apache Lounge: http://www.apachelounge.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1237 Steffen - Original Message - From: William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: dev@httpd.apache.org Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 8:41 Subject: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ will soon (within the hour, upon resync) contain the following tarballs for approval httpd-2.2.4.tar.bz2 [.asc|.md5] httpd-2.2.4.tar.gz [.asc|.md5] httpd-2.2.4-win32-src.zip [.asc|.md5] +/-1 [ ] Release httpd 2.2.4 Let the voting begin, and kick off 2.2.5 efforts. I understand Jim is still interested in RM'ing 2.2.5 later this month. Bill
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
I'll give it another whack later today but from IDE this time. I'll keep you posted On 1/6/07, Gustavo Lopes mail:Apache@geleia.net wrote: No problems compiling (with openssl0.9.8d and zlib1.2.3) with visual studio 2005 from the command line, except for the usual trouble with the manifest files. Adding: $(MAKE) $(MAKEOPT) -f Makefile.win SHORT=$(SHORT) LONG=$(LONG) \ _copybin src_exe=exe.manifest src_dll=dll.manifest src_so=so.manifest quiet=- \ inst_exe=$(INSTDIR)\bin \ inst_dll=$(INSTDIR)\bin \ inst_so=$(INSTDIR)\modules to the makefile automates the copy of the manifest files and resolves the problem. Maybe it's worth adding this or something to run mt.exe and embed the manifests. -- Gustavo Lopes -- ~Jorge
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
where exactly did you add this in the Makefile? After some searching it does seem that the errors I' mgetting are related to missing or wrong manifest files. On 1/6/07, Gustavo Lopes mail:Apache@geleia.net wrote: No problems compiling (with openssl0.9.8d and zlib1.2.3) with visual studio 2005 from the command line, except for the usual trouble with the manifest files. Adding: $(MAKE) $(MAKEOPT) -f Makefile.win SHORT=$(SHORT) LONG=$(LONG) \ _copybin src_exe=exe.manifest src_dll=dll.manifest src_so=so.manifest quiet=- \ inst_exe=$(INSTDIR)\bin \ inst_dll=$(INSTDIR)\bin \ inst_so=$(INSTDIR)\modules to the makefile automates the copy of the manifest files and resolves the problem. Maybe it's worth adding this or something to run mt.exe and embed the manifests. -- Gustavo Lopes -- ~Jorge
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
Only meant to help ASF with testing by much ppl as possible. It is not on the (official) download page of the Apachelounge. I stated to advise ASF, it's a RC and not released by ASF. When I follow your advise: ... add the binaries to your ApacheLounge ***after*** the vote to release was tallied. Then I see no way to let so much ppl test to verify the quality. I plan to remove the binary or that they can download on request to me, a pity. Btw. I see no difference to publish unreleased binaries or sources like you do. Steffen - Original Message - From: William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: dev@httpd.apache.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 18:39 Subject: Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review Very true. Steffan, in order to be a community player, we prefer that you do NOT publish unreleased binaries unless you VERY CLEARLY designate them as YOUR release of the ASF's code. Even at that, it's in poor form. Because you participate here, you'll see the vote tally and know when we start the short countdown between staging the release, and sending out the Announcement. We appreciate your enthusiasm, and encourage you to keep building/keep posting to help us determine if the release is ready. But we would really *prefer* you actually add the binaries to your ApacheLounge ***after*** the vote to release was tallied, please? Yours, Bill Jeff Trawick wrote: On 1/6/07, Steffen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Builds fine with Visual Studio 2005 Service Pack 1 It is available with SSL at the Apache Lounge: http://www.apachelounge.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1237 one note: if 2.2.4 proves to be a dud over the next few days, it won't be released by the ASF; that wasn't clear from your introductory post .
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
Gustavo Lopes wrote: No problems compiling (with openssl0.9.8d and zlib1.2.3) with visual studio 2005 from the command line, except for the usual trouble with the manifest files. What trouble? All the libraries/exe's have a post build step that does this. Going back to a virgin unpack of the -src.zip - can you point out the exact issue you encountered?
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Gustavo Lopes wrote: No problems compiling (with openssl0.9.8d and zlib1.2.3) with visual studio 2005 from the command line, except for the usual trouble with the manifest files. What trouble? All the libraries/exe's have a post build step that does this. Going back to a virgin unpack of the -src.zip - can you point out the exact issue you encountered? Nevermind - I see we apparently haven't finished backporting the .manifest work from SVN trunk/ (the 2.3 development branch). I *really* like your hack Gustavo :) Steffan - given that you aren't having issues either, which hack did you use for the .manifest data? Bill
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
where exactly did you add this in the Makefile? After some searching it does seem that the errors I' mgetting are related to missing or wrong manifest files. Line 608 of /Makefile.win. Then prepare the environment and build with nmake -f Makefile.win PORT=80 INSTDIR=x:\path installr You can always manually copy the manifest files. -- Gustavo Lopes
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
I only building with the IDE, it embeds the manifests auto. For a command-line build I should advise: Do not clutter the makefiles with specific VC2005 stuff, but use a .bat file to embed the manifests, so no external manifest files: manifestVC2005.bat mt -manifest ab.exe.manifest -outputresource:ab.exe;1 mt -manifest httpd.exe.manifest -outputresource:httpd.exe;1 mt -manifest rotatelogs.exe.manifest -outputresource:rotatelogs.exe;1 ... ... mt -manifest mod_actions.so.manifest -outputresource:mod_actions.so;1 mt -manifest mod_alias.so.manifest -outputresource:mod_alias.so;1 ... ... etc. etc. Steffen - Original Message - From: William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: dev@httpd.apache.org Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 20:21 Subject: Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Gustavo Lopes wrote: No problems compiling (with openssl0.9.8d and zlib1.2.3) with visual studio 2005 from the command line, except for the usual trouble with the manifest files. What trouble? All the libraries/exe's have a post build step that does this. Going back to a virgin unpack of the -src.zip - can you point out the exact issue you encountered? Nevermind - I see we apparently haven't finished backporting the .manifest work from SVN trunk/ (the 2.3 development branch). I *really* like your hack Gustavo :) Steffan - given that you aren't having issues either, which hack did you use for the .manifest data? Bill
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
On 01/06/2007 08:41 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ will soon (within the hour, upon resync) contain the following tarballs for approval httpd-2.2.4.tar.bz2 [.asc|.md5] .asc / .md5 OK httpd-2.2.4.tar.gz [.asc|.md5] .asc / .md5 OK +1 on Solaris 8 / 9, gcc 3.3.2 The following warnings showed up: network_io/unix/sendrecv.c: In function `apr_socket_sendfile': network_io/unix/sendrecv.c:875: warning: cast from pointer to integer of different size network_io/unix/sendrecv.c:899: warning: cast from pointer to integer of different size threadproc/unix/thread.c: In function `apr_thread_once_init': threadproc/unix/thread.c:292: warning: missing braces around initializer threadproc/unix/thread.c:292: warning: (near initialization for `once_init.__pthread_once_pad') mod_dbd.c: In function `dbd_param': mod_dbd.c:112: warning: subscript has type `char' mod_dbd.c:117: warning: subscript has type `char' mod_dbd.c:122: warning: subscript has type `char' mod_dbd.c:127: warning: subscript has type `char' mod_log_forensic.c: In function `log_before': mod_log_forensic.c:199: warning: unsigned int format, pid_t arg (arg 3) mod_proxy_balancer.c: In function `get_cookie_param': mod_proxy_balancer.c:144: warning: subscript has type `char' mod_proxy_balancer.c:147: warning: subscript has type `char' -0 on SuSE Linux 10.1 x86_64, gcc 4.1.0 Due to the apr-util bug 41308 (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41308) the 64 bit build does not work if a system wide 32 bit expat library is present. The following warnings showed up: trings/apr_snprintf.c: In function 'conv_os_thread_t': strings/apr_snprintf.c:511: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules strings/apr_snprintf.c: In function 'conv_os_thread_t_hex': strings/apr_snprintf.c:681: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules buckets/apr_brigade.c: In function 'apr_brigade_to_iovec': buckets/apr_brigade.c:337: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules fdqueue.c: In function 'queue_info_cleanup': fdqueue.c:46: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules fdqueue.c: In function 'ap_queue_info_set_idle': fdqueue.c:99: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules fdqueue.c: In function 'ap_queue_info_wait_for_idler': fdqueue.c:193: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules proxy_util.c: In function 'ap_proxy_initialize_worker': proxy_util.c:1723: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules mod_proxy_ajp.c: In function 'ap_proxy_ajp_request': mod_proxy_ajp.c:229: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules mod_proxy_ajp.c:392: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules ssl_engine_init.c: In function 'ssl_init_FindCAList': ssl_engine_init.c:1187: warning: value computed is not used mod_cgid.c: In function 'cgid_start': mod_cgid.c:617: warning: 'env' may be used uninitialized in this function mod_cgid.c:616: warning: 'argv0' may be used uninitialized in this function In total I am +1 on releasing. Regards Rüdiger
Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.4 release candidate for review
Ruediger Pluem wrote: -0 on SuSE Linux 10.1 x86_64, gcc 4.1.0 Due to the apr-util bug 41308 (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41308) the 64 bit build does not work if a system wide 32 bit expat library is present. Can you clarify - if you specific --with-builtin-expat does the issue persist?
