Hello,
I'm Bruno Moreira Guedes, from Brazil(sorry, I don't speak english
very well, but I'm trying).
I'm a C/C++ programmer, and I work with integrating software(hardware
X software, software X software).
I'm a student too, so I want to involve squid with my project. I need
to develop an UML
On Tue, 2008-05-06 at 02:38 -0300, Bruno Moreira Guedes wrote:
Hello,
I'm Bruno Moreira Guedes, from Brazil(sorry, I don't speak english
very well, but I'm trying).
I'm a C/C++ programmer, and I work with integrating software(hardware
X software, software X software).
I'm a student too,
On Sat, 2008-05-03 at 00:02 +1200, Amos Jeffries wrote:
The recent squid-users request made me check the documentation for
maximum_object_size_in_memory. I realised that in RAM-only caches it
would limit the max-size of all files.
Given that RAM-cache is now the backup default method. And
I don't think the zph patch belongs in 3.0.STABLE. It's a new feature
with several new directives, not a bugfix, and additionally I'd like a
bit of cleanup before release.
Saw that it got merged to 3.0 some day ago... and I vote that it gets
backed out from 3.0. But should stay in trunk.
Regards
On Tue, 2008-05-06 at 15:48 -0400, Michael Conlen wrote:
Hey, I'm the systems manager and developer for a business with a
significant internet presence which uses squid to cache static content
to reduce load from the apache cluster to the NFS server. I'm
interested in modifying squid to
Is the internal rewrite work going to go into a release any time soon?
It looks quite useful.
Also, from browsing through the code briefly, it looks like it would
be fairly easy to hook things up so that you could configure the
request sent to the external helper (as with other helpers),
I don't think the zph patch belongs in 3.0.STABLE. It's a new feature
with several new directives, not a bugfix, and additionally I'd like a
bit of cleanup before release.
Saw that it got merged to 3.0 some day ago... and I vote that it gets
backed out from 3.0. But should stay in trunk.
I
On Wed, 2008-05-07 at 14:38 +1200, Amos Jeffries wrote:
I don't think the zph patch belongs in 3.0.STABLE. It's a new feature
with several new directives, not a bugfix, and additionally I'd like a
bit of cleanup before release.
Saw that it got merged to 3.0 some day ago... and I vote
On Wed, May 07, 2008, Mark Nottingham wrote:
Is the internal rewrite work going to go into a release any time soon?
It looks quite useful.
Its in Squid-2.HEAD.
Also, from browsing through the code briefly, it looks like it would
be fairly easy to hook things up so that you could
On Wed, May 07, 2008, Amos Jeffries wrote:
I added it as a simple cross-port. Seeing as it's been well tested as a
patch on 2.6. even if not integrated until recently.
The polish was going to go in 3.1 when I have time.
Any other votes for/against?
I'm against it in 3.0 on principle; 3.0
On Sat, 2008-05-03 at 00:02 +1200, Amos Jeffries wrote:
The recent squid-users request made me check the documentation for
maximum_object_size_in_memory. I realised that in RAM-only caches it
would limit the max-size of all files.
Given that RAM-cache is now the backup default method. And
11 matches
Mail list logo
