On Mon, 1 Mar 2004, Gerard Eviston wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 09:07 am, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
> > 2.5.STABLE5 has been rolled. If you can please give it a try before the
> > wide public announcement.
>
> I was getting some assertion failures yesterday with -20040227, I think it was
> auth_us
On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 09:07 am, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
> 2.5.STABLE5 has been rolled. If you can please give it a try before the
> wide public announcement.
I was getting some assertion failures yesterday with -20040227, I think it was
auth_user_request != null or something else ntlm related. I'm
2.5.STABLE5 has been rolled. If you can please give it a try before the
wide public announcement.
Regards
Henrik
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004, Jon Kay wrote:
> ...regardless of that last sentence, virtually all browsers appear to
> use Content-Encoding to indicate message encoding rather than entity
> encoding. Virtually none support Transfer-Encoding of any sort.
Content-Encoding is what a web server would general
On Sun, Feb 29, 2004, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Feb 2004, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>
> > Does anyone have any issues if I commit this code tomorrow morning, GMT+8 time?
> > I'd like to move onto the next bug. :-)
>
> No problem here, assuming it now passes the tests outlined before.
It did
Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
See programmers guide chapters on Client Streams. I think you will find
this fits quite nicely for Content-Encoding requirements. Exacly where to
add the logics on when to stack the content-encoding client stream pipe
onto the reply path is another question.
This c
On Sat, 28 Feb 2004, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Does anyone have any issues if I commit this code tomorrow morning, GMT+8 time?
> I'd like to move onto the next bug. :-)
No problem here, assuming it now passes the tests outlined before.
Regards
Henrik
