On Sat, 2007-04-07 at 19:48 +0200, Guido Serassio wrote:
There are some bugs probably ready to be commited/closed:
#1889: If the latest Henrik's comment is true, this bug is still
fixed and can be closed
#1837: New patch available
#1829: Probably the proposed fix could be enough
#1900:
Hi there,
I went through the remaining Squid3 non-enhancement bug reports
targeted for 3.0. For most bugs, I was able to close or comment in the
bugzilla. The following bugs are special because the questions did not
seem appropriate for bugzilla. Please review.
On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 09:26 -0600, Alex Rousskov wrote:
On Sat, 2007-04-07 at 19:48 +0200, Guido Serassio wrote:
There are some bugs probably ready to be commited/closed:
#1889: If the latest Henrik's comment is true, this bug is still
fixed and can be closed
#1837: New patch
Alex Rousskov wrote:
Hi there,
I went through the remaining Squid3 non-enhancement bug reports
targeted for 3.0. For most bugs, I was able to close or comment in the
bugzilla. The following bugs are special because the questions did not
seem appropriate for bugzilla. Please review.
tor 2007-04-12 klockan 20:31 +0200 skrev Guido Serassio:
Here I think that a methodical comparison between 2.6 and 3.0 is needed.
Not so sure. Find it much more important Squid-3 is stable than feature
complete wrt 2.6.
Probably there are a lot of not so big changes missing in 3.0.
Very
tor 2007-04-12 klockan 11:42 -0600 skrev Alex Rousskov:
http://www.squid-cache.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=1475
Bug 1475 - File descriptor limit does work.
I am not sure what the final resolution for this bug is. Henrik?
Adrian?
Closing..
ESI bugs targeted for 3.0
On Wed, 4 Apr 2007, Adrian Chadd wrote:
I hate to ask for help when I said I'd do it, but I'm running very short
on spare time at the moment and I'd appreciate some help in finishing
off the new.squid-cache.org website so its ready to be made live.
Someone with server access: help, please?
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007, Alex Rousskov wrote:
rousskov2007/04/12 08:51:10 MDT
Modified files:
src main.cc
Log:
This change should fix bug #1837: Segfault on configuration error
When quitting on a fatal error, such as a configuration error, Squid may need
to write
On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 01:40 +0200, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
yay! this has been causing me some nightmares just thinking about
it.
I'll get onto a purge this weekend unless there is anyone else who
wants
to do it or veto it.
Speak up within 8 hours or I'll create a 'nocpp' branch and
On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 12:45 +1200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It has not been linked to the cppunit testers, but I have written a
specific test app to check each function and proivide for maula-eye
check
in increments from simplest up for both ipv4-pure then dual protocol
paths.
Then it has
On Thu, Apr 12, 2007, Duane Wessels wrote:
you can coordinate with me directly and I'll get it done.
All thats left is to fixup the snapshot scripts in 2, 2.6 and 3
CVS to take a distribution path (defaulting to what it is now)
and then change Henrik's nightly snapshot-building scripts to
use
tor 2007-04-12 klockan 13:19 -0600 skrev Alex Rousskov:
IMO, if we can support enough directives to accommodate 51% of current
Squid2 users, that is enough.
More importantly, thanks to the new major features of Squid-3 such as a
good ICAP client we might attract new users again, not only
On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 12:45 +1200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It has not been linked to the cppunit testers, but I have written a
specific test app to check each function and proivide for maula-eye
check
in increments from simplest up for both ipv4-pure then dual protocol
paths.
Then it has
On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 13:27 +1200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 12:45 +1200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It has not been linked to the cppunit testers, but I have written a
specific test app to check each function and proivide for maula-eye
check
in increments from
On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 21:01 -0600, Alex Rousskov wrote:
Running make check (or whatever it is) would run cppunit test cases
if
somebody has cppunit installed and should skip them (with a warning)
if
somebody does not have cppunit installed.
If there is a special make target to force
On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 13:27 +1200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 12:45 +1200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It has not been linked to the cppunit testers, but I have written a
specific test app to check each function and proivide for maula-eye
check
in increments from
On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 13:23 +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 21:01 -0600, Alex Rousskov wrote:
Running make check (or whatever it is) would run cppunit test cases
if somebody has cppunit installed and should skip them (with a warning)
if somebody does not have cppunit
On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 18:16 -0600, Duane Wessels wrote:
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007, Alex Rousskov wrote:
rousskov2007/04/12 08:51:10 MDT
Modified files:
src main.cc
Log:
This change should fix bug #1837: Segfault on configuration error
When quitting on a
On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 22:02 -0600, Alex Rousskov wrote:
That is good, but I do not think we should require it. Cppunit is a
developer tool. Make check is a user-level reassurance that the
package was built correctly.
I think this is the root of our disagreement. 'make check' to me is not,
On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 14:29 +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 22:02 -0600, Alex Rousskov wrote:
That is good, but I do not think we should require it. Cppunit is a
developer tool. Make check is a user-level reassurance that the
package was built correctly.
...
I think
On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 14:29 +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 22:02 -0600, Alex Rousskov wrote:
That is good, but I do not think we should require it. Cppunit is a
developer tool. Make check is a user-level reassurance that the
package was built correctly.
I think
21 matches
Mail list logo
