Re: cppcheck finding

and what about CI ? something like gitlab-ci, travis, jenkins ? I'll invest some efforts in that 2017-09-15 18:04 GMT+05:00 Christopher Faulet : > Le 15/09/2017 à 08:36, Илья Шипицин a écrit : > >> great, thank for the feedback. >> >> there're few things like that >> >>

Re: Dynamic server name with HAProxy, based on original hostname

Hi, I imagine that if I have no answer, it's because it isn't possible with HAProxy ? Thanks for your return. 2017-09-10 22:27 GMT+02:00 Ludovic Gasc : > Hi, > > I'm trying to reproduce this Nginx configuration with HAProxy: >

Re: cppcheck finding

Le 15/09/2017 à 15:07, Илья Шипицин a écrit : and what about CI ? something like gitlab-ci, travis, jenkins ? I'll invest some efforts in that No CI. This would be useful to have one but we have no time to work on it for now. Having a CI is not a big deal. The harder is to write tests and

Re: Dynamic server name with HAProxy, based on original hostname

On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 9:25 PM, Ludovic Gasc wrote: > Hi, > > I imagine that if I have no answer, it's because it isn't possible with > HAProxy ? > > Thanks for your return. > > > 2017-09-10 22:27 GMT+02:00 Ludovic Gasc : > >> Hi, >> >> I'm trying to

Re: cppcheck finding

Le 15/09/2017 à 08:36, Илья Шипицин a écrit : great, thank for the feedback. there're few things like that [src/flt_http_comp.c:926] -> [src/flt_http_comp.c:926]: (warning) Either the condition 'txn' is redundant or there is possible null pointer dereference: txn. [src/flt_spoe.c:2765] ->

Re: Dynamic server name with HAProxy, based on original hostname

I have tested with HAProxy 1.7. Where you see that it's a feature of 1.8 ? You mean I could try my piece of configuration on HAProxy 1.8, it should work ? Regards. 2017-09-15 14:47 GMT+02:00 Igor Cicimov : > > > On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 9:25 PM, Ludovic Gasc

Re: cppcheck finding

On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 06:36:20PM +0500, ??? wrote: > I'd say, it's chicken and egg situation. Whichever comes first, tests or CI. > if we start a CI with "just build", it will evolve, people will start > writing tests (I beleive so) I tend to believe it as well. However what I'm less

Re: Long Running TCP Connections and Reloads

We are using a patched version from April that fixed a big memory leak that occurred on another project, so it looks like it would have had that fix. HAPROXY_VERSION=1.7.7a450ca HAPROXY_MD5=fa9c6d9af600e12ef31567b941fa1dfb Dave From: "Krishna Kumar (Engineering)"

Re: Kernel TLS for http/2

Hi, > Le 14 sept. 2017 à 19:34, Lukas Tribus a écrit : > > Hello, > > > Am 05.09.2017 um 10:00 schrieb Willy Tarreau: >> >> As I already mentionned (I don't remember to whom), I really don't see *any* >> benefit in this approach and only problems in fact. By the way, others

Re: cppcheck finding

2017-09-15 18:22 GMT+05:00 Christopher Faulet : > Le 15/09/2017 à 15:07, Илья Шипицин a écrit : > >> and what about CI ? >> >> something like gitlab-ci, travis, jenkins ? I'll invest some efforts in >> that >> >> > No CI. This would be useful to have one but we have no time

Re: cppcheck finding

2017-09-15 21:29 GMT+05:00 Aleksandar Lazic : > Hi. > > Willy Tarreau wrote on 15.09.2017: > > > On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 06:36:20PM +0500, ??? wrote: > >> I'd say, it's chicken and egg situation. Whichever comes first, tests > or CI. > >> if we start a CI with "just

Re: cppcheck finding

Hi Aleks, On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 06:29:42PM +0200, Aleksandar Lazic wrote: > Hi. > > Willy Tarreau wrote on 15.09.2017: > > > On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 06:36:20PM +0500, ??? wrote: > >> I'd say, it's chicken and egg situation. Whichever comes first, tests or > >> CI. > >> if we start a

Re: cppcheck finding

Hi all, Le 15/09/2017 à 18:40, Willy Tarreau a écrit : I once had an interesting discussion with PHK who proposed to extend the varnish test program to also cover haproxy so that we could write various test cases, as he wrote this tool to address exactly the same issue. It could be an option,

Re: cppcheck finding

On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 03:04:26PM +0200, Christopher Faulet wrote: > You're right, there are bugs there. The worst is on the compression filter. > I attached patches to fix them. > > Willy, could you merge it please ? Some of them must be backported in 1.7. Now applied, thanks Christopher.

more cppcheck findings

hello, [contrib/halog/halog.c:1572]: (error) Memory leak: ustat [contrib/mod_defender/defender.c:153]: (error) va_list 'argp' was opened but not closed by va_end(). [contrib/modsecurity/modsec_wrapper.c:109]: (error) va_list 'ap' was opened but not closed by va_end(). [src/51d.c:373]: (error)

CI/CD HAProxy

Hi, I wanted to open a new thread, as "cppcheck finding" was hijacked with this CICD / testing ;) I think the best is the enemy of the good : why not start with a few easy tests ? For example just a mix of tiny / big config files to test the parser. I understand the difficult part of the test

Re: cppcheck finding

Hello Ilya, On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 11:11:36PM +0500, ??? wrote: > hello, > > [src/flt_http_comp.c:926] -> [src/flt_http_comp.c:926]: (warning) Either > the condition 'txn' is redundant or there is possible null pointer > dereference: txn. > > should there be && instead of || ? You're

Re: cppcheck finding

great, thank for the feedback. there're few things like that [src/flt_http_comp.c:926] -> [src/flt_http_comp.c:926]: (warning) Either the condition 'txn' is redundant or there is possible null pointer dereference: txn. [src/flt_spoe.c:2765] -> [src/flt_spoe.c:2766]: (warning) Either the

Re: cppcheck finding

Hi. Willy Tarreau wrote on 15.09.2017: > On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 06:36:20PM +0500, ??? wrote: >> I'd say, it's chicken and egg situation. Whichever comes first, tests or CI. >> if we start a CI with "just build", it will evolve, people will start >> writing tests (I beleive so) > I