Re: release roll soon?
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 4:33 PM ste...@eissing.org wrote: > > Found https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64753 > > Switch the configure.in to the one in branches/1.7.x, buildconf again and now > it compiles The checked in patch seems to be https://svn.apache.org/r1871981 > > Seems, a new APR release would be nice for the poor macOS people... On its way, AIUI. Cheers; Yann.
Re: release roll soon?
> Am 10.09.2021 um 16:31 schrieb Yann Ylavic : > > On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 4:18 PM ste...@eissing.org wrote: >> >> APR experts: I build the -deps tar with apr 1.7.0 / apr-util 1.6.1. Those >> are looked up at the site as the latest, just like the old scripts did. >> However, that will not configure on my macOS. The branches/1.7.x which I >> normally use does. >> >> ./include/apr.h:561:2: error: Can not determine the proper size for pid_t >> >> any one can help my poor memory on how to work around that? > > You could test the non-deps tarball and have your usual 1.7.x checkout > in srclib? > The -deps are only provided for convenience, in this case it simply > does not help macOS users. > If you want to email me with the tarball I can smoke test it on linux at > least. Found https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64753 Switch the configure.in to the one in branches/1.7.x, buildconf again and now it compiles Seems, a new APR release would be nice for the poor macOS people... > >> >> I have the insane plan to actually test the tars before putting them out for >> voting... > > That'll teach you.. I learn so much from my mistakes, I just make some more! > > > Cheers; > Yann.
Re: release roll soon?
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 4:18 PM ste...@eissing.org wrote: > > APR experts: I build the -deps tar with apr 1.7.0 / apr-util 1.6.1. Those are > looked up at the site as the latest, just like the old scripts did. > However, that will not configure on my macOS. The branches/1.7.x which I > normally use does. > > ./include/apr.h:561:2: error: Can not determine the proper size for pid_t > > any one can help my poor memory on how to work around that? You could test the non-deps tarball and have your usual 1.7.x checkout in srclib? The -deps are only provided for convenience, in this case it simply does not help macOS users. If you want to email me with the tarball I can smoke test it on linux at least. > > I have the insane plan to actually test the tars before putting them out for > voting... That'll teach you.. Cheers; Yann.
Re: release roll soon?
APR experts: I build the -deps tar with apr 1.7.0 / apr-util 1.6.1. Those are looked up at the site as the latest, just like the old scripts did. However, that will not configure on my macOS. The branches/1.7.x which I normally use does. ./include/apr.h:561:2: error: Can not determine the proper size for pid_t any one can help my poor memory on how to work around that? I have the insane plan to actually test the tars before putting them out for voting... - Stefan > Am 10.09.2021 um 12:12 schrieb Ruediger Pluem : > > > > On 9/10/21 12:07 PM, ste...@eissing.org wrote: >> > >> So far, I hear that people think we should make a 2.4.49 based >> on the current 2.4.x. >> >> I will do some IRL errands and things and come back to this >> in the afternoon. If this still stands then, I'll create a >> 2.4.49-rc1 and put that to the vote. >> > > Sounds good. Thanks for all your work on this and especially on the scripting. > > Regards > > Rüdiger
Re: release roll soon?
On 9/10/21 12:07 PM, ste...@eissing.org wrote: > > So far, I hear that people think we should make a 2.4.49 based > on the current 2.4.x. > > I will do some IRL errands and things and come back to this > in the afternoon. If this still stands then, I'll create a > 2.4.49-rc1 and put that to the vote. > Sounds good. Thanks for all your work on this and especially on the scripting. Regards Rüdiger
Re: release roll soon?
> Am 10.09.2021 um 11:07 schrieb Ruediger Pluem : > > > > On 9/10/21 10:50 AM, Joe Orton wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 09:42:10AM +0200, ste...@eissing.org wrote: >>> >>> Am 10.09.2021 um 09:02 schrieb Joe Orton : On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 03:23:13PM -0700, Gregg Smith wrote: > Since OpenSSL 3.0.0 GA came out yesterday (Californuts time) I think it > would be nice to have r1891138 backported for those wishing to try it out. > What you say? I'd say it's better to try to get a successful release out, then try to get new features in the stable branch. (In fact, I'd be quite happy if we had 2.5.x/2.6 released and stopped trying new features in 2.4 :) That revision is not sufficient, I have a hopefully-complete set of OpenSSL 3.0 backports at: https://github.com/apache/httpd/pull/258 >>> >>> Do you want that in 2.4.49? (we can always to a 2.4.50 OpenSSL3 >>> release shortly afterwards, imo) >> >> For me, I'd not want to delay or risk regressions in .49 for this, it's >> only a small niche of users who care about it at the moment. I plan to >> propose the PR for backport after the next release. > > +1 > >> >> (It'd be nice to get 3.0 building in Travis so we can be more confident >> about keeping that working, not sure if anybody is testing trunk against >> it regularly right now?) > > +1 So far, I hear that people think we should make a 2.4.49 based on the current 2.4.x. I will do some IRL errands and things and come back to this in the afternoon. If this still stands then, I'll create a 2.4.49-rc1 and put that to the vote. cheers, Stefan
Re: release roll soon?
On 9/10/21 10:50 AM, Joe Orton wrote: > On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 09:42:10AM +0200, ste...@eissing.org wrote: >> >> >>> Am 10.09.2021 um 09:02 schrieb Joe Orton : >>> >>> On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 03:23:13PM -0700, Gregg Smith wrote: Since OpenSSL 3.0.0 GA came out yesterday (Californuts time) I think it would be nice to have r1891138 backported for those wishing to try it out. What you say? >>> >>> I'd say it's better to try to get a successful release out, then try to >>> get new features in the stable branch. (In fact, I'd be quite happy if >>> we had 2.5.x/2.6 released and stopped trying new features in 2.4 :) >>> >>> That revision is not sufficient, I have a hopefully-complete set of >>> OpenSSL 3.0 backports at: https://github.com/apache/httpd/pull/258 >> >> Do you want that in 2.4.49? (we can always to a 2.4.50 OpenSSL3 >> release shortly afterwards, imo) > > For me, I'd not want to delay or risk regressions in .49 for this, it's > only a small niche of users who care about it at the moment. I plan to > propose the PR for backport after the next release. +1 > > (It'd be nice to get 3.0 building in Travis so we can be more confident > about keeping that working, not sure if anybody is testing trunk against > it regularly right now?) +1 Regards Rüdiger
Re: release roll soon?
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 09:42:10AM +0200, ste...@eissing.org wrote: > > > > Am 10.09.2021 um 09:02 schrieb Joe Orton : > > > > On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 03:23:13PM -0700, Gregg Smith wrote: > >> Since OpenSSL 3.0.0 GA came out yesterday (Californuts time) I think it > >> would be nice to have r1891138 backported for those wishing to try it out. > >> What you say? > > > > I'd say it's better to try to get a successful release out, then try to > > get new features in the stable branch. (In fact, I'd be quite happy if > > we had 2.5.x/2.6 released and stopped trying new features in 2.4 :) > > > > That revision is not sufficient, I have a hopefully-complete set of > > OpenSSL 3.0 backports at: https://github.com/apache/httpd/pull/258 > > Do you want that in 2.4.49? (we can always to a 2.4.50 OpenSSL3 > release shortly afterwards, imo) For me, I'd not want to delay or risk regressions in .49 for this, it's only a small niche of users who care about it at the moment. I plan to propose the PR for backport after the next release. (It'd be nice to get 3.0 building in Travis so we can be more confident about keeping that working, not sure if anybody is testing trunk against it regularly right now?) Regards, Joe
Re: release roll soon?
Indeed it kind of sounds too early to go with OpenSSL 3 yet to consider for a stable release of apache. (Too fresh out of the oven?) El vie., 10 sept. 2021 9:42, ste...@eissing.org escribió: > > > > Am 10.09.2021 um 09:02 schrieb Joe Orton : > > > > On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 03:23:13PM -0700, Gregg Smith wrote: > >> Since OpenSSL 3.0.0 GA came out yesterday (Californuts time) I think it > >> would be nice to have r1891138 backported for those wishing to try it > out. > >> What you say? > > > > I'd say it's better to try to get a successful release out, then try to > > get new features in the stable branch. (In fact, I'd be quite happy if > > we had 2.5.x/2.6 released and stopped trying new features in 2.4 :) > > > > That revision is not sufficient, I have a hopefully-complete set of > > OpenSSL 3.0 backports at: https://github.com/apache/httpd/pull/258 > > Do you want that in 2.4.49? (we can always to a 2.4.50 OpenSSL3 release > shortly afterwards, imo) > > - Stefan
Re: release roll soon?
> Am 10.09.2021 um 09:02 schrieb Joe Orton : > > On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 03:23:13PM -0700, Gregg Smith wrote: >> Since OpenSSL 3.0.0 GA came out yesterday (Californuts time) I think it >> would be nice to have r1891138 backported for those wishing to try it out. >> What you say? > > I'd say it's better to try to get a successful release out, then try to > get new features in the stable branch. (In fact, I'd be quite happy if > we had 2.5.x/2.6 released and stopped trying new features in 2.4 :) > > That revision is not sufficient, I have a hopefully-complete set of > OpenSSL 3.0 backports at: https://github.com/apache/httpd/pull/258 Do you want that in 2.4.49? (we can always to a 2.4.50 OpenSSL3 release shortly afterwards, imo) - Stefan
Re: release roll soon?
On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 03:23:13PM -0700, Gregg Smith wrote: > Since OpenSSL 3.0.0 GA came out yesterday (Californuts time) I think it > would be nice to have r1891138 backported for those wishing to try it out. > What you say? I'd say it's better to try to get a successful release out, then try to get new features in the stable branch. (In fact, I'd be quite happy if we had 2.5.x/2.6 released and stopped trying new features in 2.4 :) That revision is not sufficient, I have a hopefully-complete set of OpenSSL 3.0 backports at: https://github.com/apache/httpd/pull/258 Regards, Joe
Re: release roll soon?
On Thu, 9 Sept 2021 at 22:23, Gregg Smith wrote: > > Since OpenSSL 3.0.0 GA came out yesterday (Californuts time) I think it > would be nice to have r1891138 backported for those wishing to try it > out. What you say? +1 for the backport
Re: release roll soon?
On 9/9/21 18:23, Gregg Smith wrote: > Since OpenSSL 3.0.0 GA came out yesterday (Californuts time) I think it > would be nice to have r1891138 backported for those wishing to try it > out. What you say? I have been doing some testing with the OpenSSL beta releases for quite some time now. However recently my Apache trunk builds have been running into problems with autotools and basic configuration steps. I may reach out to the maillist regarding that. -- Dennis Clarke RISC-V/SPARC/PPC/ARM/CISC UNIX and Linux spoken GreyBeard and suspenders optional
Re: release roll soon?
Since OpenSSL 3.0.0 GA came out yesterday (Californuts time) I think it would be nice to have r1891138 backported for those wishing to try it out. What you say? Cheers, Gregg
Re: release roll soon?
On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 4:11 PM ste...@eissing.org wrote: > > FYI: from the script side, I am ready to roll the first candidate. > - We have one security issue in a not quite complete state > - There are 2 possible back ports hanging in STATUS > > We can see tomorrow how comfy we are and either I roll right away or > we target Monday/Tuesday, I suppose. +1, works either way for me.
release roll soon?
FYI: from the script side, I am ready to roll the first candidate. - We have one security issue in a not quite complete state - There are 2 possible back ports hanging in STATUS We can see tomorrow how comfy we are and either I roll right away or we target Monday/Tuesday, I suppose. cheers, Stefan
