On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 10:14, Pete Houston wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 06:07:39PM +0100, Steve Hay wrote:
> >
> > I'm not sure about this area, but if it works for with your patch then
> > it's probably an improvement :-)
> >
> > Just out of interest, does the following alternative patch
On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 06:07:39PM +0100, Steve Hay wrote:
>
> I'm not sure about this area, but if it works for with your patch then
> it's probably an improvement :-)
>
> Just out of interest, does the following alternative patch work?
>
> Index: lib/Apache2/Resource.pm
>
On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 11:03, Pete Houston wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 08:13:59AM +0100, Steve Hay wrote:
> >
> > I think the last line of the log extracts above is the clue, but I'm
> > not going to be able to fix this myself. Line 119 in
> > Apache2/Resource.pm is:
> >
> > my
On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 08:13:59AM +0100, Steve Hay wrote:
>
> I think the last line of the log extracts above is the clue, but I'm
> not going to be able to fix this myself. Line 119 in
> Apache2/Resource.pm is:
>
> my ($soft, $hard) = getrlimit $val;
>
> So it looks like $val is
On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 11:32, Pete Houston wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 08:22:11AM +0100, Steve Hay wrote:
> > Can you give any more detail on the apache_resource.t failure? I've
> > not seen that reported anywhere else.
>
> $ t/TEST -verbose t/modules/apache_resource.t
> [warning] setting
+1 on gentoo with 2.4.41 prefork on perl 5.28.0
I still see the bbs tests failing as they have been. I started to look
into it a bit, and see what you're talking about with the ENV switch to
'turn off LWP', but ran out of time. It kind of looked like when LWP was
on, that the value of the
-=| Vincent Veyron, 26.09.2019 21:40:29 +0200 |=-
> On Thu, 26 Sep 2019 21:52:29 +0300
> Damyan Ivanov wrote:
> >
> > builds OK and tests pass on Debian/unstable amd64 and i386 with apache
> > 2.4.41, apr 1.6.5, Perl 5.28.1, CGI 4.44
>
> Would you mind explaining what steps you took to build
On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 08:22:11AM +0100, Steve Hay wrote:
> Can you give any more detail on the apache_resource.t failure? I've
> not seen that reported anywhere else.
$ t/TEST -verbose t/modules/apache_resource.t
[warning] setting ulimit to allow core files
ulimit -c unlimited; /usr/bin/perl
On Thu, 26 Sep 2019 at 23:05, Pete Houston wrote:
>
> This RC fails for me:
>
> Test Summary Report
> ---
> t/filter/in_bbs_inject_header.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 36 Failed: 3)
> Failed tests: 22, 26, 30
> t/modules/apache_resource.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 1 Failed: 1)
>
My test result as follows:
t/filter/in_bbs_inject_header.t . 1/? # Failed test 22 in
t/filter/in_bbs_inject_header.t at line 58 fail #6
# Failed test 26 in t/filter/in_bbs_inject_header.t at line 58 fail #7
# Failed test 30 in t/filter/in_bbs_inject_header.t at line 58 fail #8
Test
This RC fails for me:
Test Summary Report
---
t/filter/in_bbs_inject_header.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 36 Failed: 3)
Failed tests: 22, 26, 30
t/modules/apache_resource.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 1 Failed: 1)
Failed test: 1
Files=245, Tests=2607, 138 wallclock secs ( 2.26 usr
-=| Steve Hay, 26.09.2019 18:17:33 +0100 |=-
> Please download, test, and report back on this mod_perl 2.0.11 release
> candidate.
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/perl/mod_perl-2.0.11-rc3.tar.gz
builds OK and tests pass on Debian/unstable amd64 and i386 with apache
2.4.41, apr 1.6.5,
12 matches
Mail list logo
