Hi Massimo,
it is a more genera decission.
Scintific Linux, Apache etc have TCL 8.5 as default.
If we want to support them (with Rivet 3), it has to build here.
I may add a switch that TCL must have 8.6.1 minimum.
The current spec file says:
%define use_newer %(echo 'puts [package vsatisfies
On 02/16/2018 08:17 PM, Harald Oehlmann wrote:
Hi Massimo,
thank you for the reply !
About the compiler: the log file says:
gcc-4.8.2-16
You find most of this information at the top of the log file when
packages are installed.
You also have the configure options with a warning:
./configure
On 02/16/2018 08:17 PM, Harald Oehlmann wrote:
Hi Massimo,
thank you for the reply !
About the compiler: the log file says:
gcc-4.8.2-16
that's rather old, I haven't seen gcc 4.8 around for quite a long time,
but this package could not work properly (at least as a fully compatible
Hi Massimo,
thank you for the reply !
About the compiler: the log file says:
gcc-4.8.2-16
You find most of this information at the top of the log file when
packages are installed.
You also have the configure options with a warning:
./configure --build=x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu
The error is correctly raised and I wonder why other builds didn't
notice it. What C compiler are they using? The good news is the whole
function could be removed because it's not used. It was meant to clean
up the resources of a thread but as long as Tcl interpreters cannot be
safely deleted
Dear Massimo,
the rpm buildscript just makes a basic test with a file included in the
demo folder of Rivet. Maybe, this demo folder does not exist any more.
So lets look:
Log:
[ 81s] ---
[ 81s] APACHE MODULE TEST
[ 81s]
[ 81s]
Thank you Harald
the error is raised by a failed attempt to read a file, actually a Tcl
script, which is not 'sourced', it's read and stored in memory
The problem could arise from a structural flawed design of the test
suite as I have developed it from its original functionalities:
I just released rivet 3.0.1 and should be available soon from the ASF
distribution. This bugfix release basically includes
* the namespace determination in librivet has been revised to
avoid to check for the module globals and therefore avoiding
the inclusion of mod_rivet.h
* a few
Thank you Ronnie, I checked the patch and it's fine to menot for
laziness but I invite you to commit the patch yourself. I would be happy
you receive a full credit and have your name in one of rivet's ChangeLog
entries.
-- Massimo
On 02/08/2018 12:24 PM, Ronnie Brunner wrote:
Hi
ich | Switzerland | http://netcetera.com |
From: Massimo MANGHI [mailto:massimo.man...@unipr.it]
Sent: Dienstag, 6. Februar 2018 21:01
To: Ronnie Brunner <ronnie.brun...@netcetera.com>; Massimo Manghi
<massimo.man...@alice.it>; petas...@yahoo.gr
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org
Subject: Re: Rive
@yahoo.gr
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org
Subject: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Thank you Ronnie, still the discrepancy between my PC and yours bothers me
quite a bit. I would like to have more time to investigate, in the meanwhile
would you sent over your error_log and output? Thank you
-- Ma
<ronnie.brun...@netcetera.com>
Inviato: martedì 6 febbraio 2018 20:48
A: Massimo MANGHI; Massimo Manghi; petas...@yahoo.gr
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org
Oggetto: RE: Rivet 3.0.1
Hi Massimo
Sorry, I haven’t noticed your answer w/ the rc2 earlier. Thought it referred to
George’s issue with the test
[mailto:massimo.man...@unipr.it]
Sent: Dienstag, 6. Februar 2018 18:33
To: Ronnie Brunner <ronnie.brun...@netcetera.com>; Massimo Manghi
<massimo.man...@alice.it>; petas...@yahoo.gr
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org
Subject: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Hi Ronnie are your latest test results obtained from
e Brunner <ronnie.brun...@netcetera.com>; Massimo Manghi
<massimo.man...@alice.it>; petas...@yahoo.gr
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org
Subject: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Should we consider this issue a reason for withholding 3.0.1? I think that as
long as 2.2 is supported we may exploit the compatibili
ra.com>; Massimo Manghi
<massimo.man...@alice.it>; petas...@yahoo.gr
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org
Subject: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Should we consider this issue a reason for withholding 3.0.1? I think that as
long as 2.2 is supported we may exploit the compatibility with 2.4. When 2.2 is
de
be handy.
Can I start the vote for releasing 3.0.1?
-- Massimo
Da: Georgios Petasis <petas...@yahoo.gr>
Inviato: domenica 4 febbraio 2018 14:54
A: Massimo MANGHI; Ronnie Brunner; Massimo Manghi
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org
Oggetto: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Dear M
os Petasis [mailto:petas...@yahoo.gr]
Sent: Sonntag, 4. Februar 2018 14:54
To: Massimo Manghi <massimo.man...@unipr.it>; Ronnie Brunner
<ronnie.brun...@netcetera.com>; Massimo Manghi <massimo.man...@alice.it>
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org
Subject: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Dear Massimo,
According
assimo MANGHI; Ronnie Brunner; Massimo Manghi
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org
Oggetto: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Dear Massimo,
According to the documentation:
https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/developer/new_api_2_4.html
API Changes in Apache HTTP Server 2.4 since
2.2<https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/
Dear Massimo,
According to the documentation:
https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/developer/new_api_2_4.html
We should also modify rivet.c to use AP_DECLARE_MODULE instead of
"module AP_MODULE_DECLARE_DATA rivet_module = " we now have.
I have tried it, and there was no difference (of course we
I've just uploaded to www.rivetweb.org/~mxm/rivet a RC2 tar archive with
a proposed patch of the problem that made most tests fail.
The bug has surfaced when George introduced the APLOG_USE_MODULE in
mod_rivet.h, since also rivetlib/rivetPkgInit.c used it in order to get
the definition of the
@alice.it>
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org
Subject: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
That's sound like very bad news. I ran the test suite yesterday with the
worker bridge and it was OK (130 tests). What do you read in
tests/error_log ?
-- Massimo
On 02/01/2018 11:15 AM, Ronnie Brunner wrote:
> Hi Massimo
That's sound like very bad news. I ran the test suite yesterday with the
worker bridge and it was OK (130 tests). What do you read in
tests/error_log ?
-- Massimo
On 02/01/2018 11:15 AM, Ronnie Brunner wrote:
Hi Massimo
Test suite works for prefork, but just for the fun of it, I checked
Hi Massimo
Test suite works for prefork, but just for the fun of it, I checked with the
worker (and event) mpms, as you mentioned that the worker bridge was improved.
The test suite fails for some tests on both other mpms. See below.
Can you quickly elaborate whether that's OK and/or what
23 matches
Mail list logo