Important notice!
KWF Email scanner found a virus in following attachment:
Notice.zip
Content type:
application/octet-stream
Additional information from antivirus:
W95/Spaces.gen
Attachement has been removed by firewall.
This email account no longer exists.
To contact the management team of Rolia.net, please visit:
http://www.rolia.net/mem/mem_mailRolia.php
Thank you!
´Ëµç×ÓÓÊÏäÒѾֹͣʹÓÃ.
Èç¹ûÄúÒªÁªÏµÏàÔ¼¼ÓÄôóÍøÉÏÉçÇø(Rolia.net),
Çë·ÃÎÊ´ËÍøÒ³:
http://www.rolia.net/mem/mem_mailRolia.php
Please take me off this mail list.
Many Thanks
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 25 July 2004 10:46
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: jakarta-tomcat-5/jakarta-tomcat-5 success
To whom it may satisfy...
This is an
remm2004/07/26 01:09:21
Modified:catalina/src/share/org/apache/catalina/startup
HostConfig.java ContextRuleSet.java
catalina/src/share/org/apache/catalina/core
StandardContext.java
Graham Leggett wrote:
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Until I'm shown a mod_proxy (with HTTP) with performance close to
mod_jk, my opinion is that we can't use it.
As I've pointed out already, mod_proxy is a framework. The performance
numbers quoted tested mod_proxy_http, not mod_proxy, which doesn't do
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30291.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Graham Leggett wrote:
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Until I'm shown a mod_proxy (with HTTP) with performance close to
mod_jk, my opinion is that we can't use it.
As I've pointed out already, mod_proxy is a framework. The performance
numbers quoted tested mod_proxy_http, not
Bill Barker wrote:
I'm with Graham on this. Personally, I have very little interest in a
mod_ajp module, but I am interested in proxy_ajp, proxy_lb, etc. Of course,
since j-t-c has long doubled as j-t-sandbox, this means that I'm +0 for
committing your stuff there.
Well Mladen has been quick to
Hi all,
There has been some serious discussion for building load balancing support
for mod_proxy.
Here is the first in series of patches that will enable this.
The patch adds lb support in scoreboard, so that statuses for each lb worker
can be calculated for each child process.
It uses optional
Henri Gomez wrote:
Bill Barker wrote:
I'm with Graham on this. Personally, I have very little
interest in a
mod_ajp module, but I am interested in proxy_ajp, proxy_lb,
etc. Of
course, since j-t-c has long doubled as j-t-sandbox, this
means that
I'm +0 for committing your
Remy Maucherat wrote:
The framework itself could be designed in a way which would end up
hurting performance. It did happen in Tomcat in the past, and I don't
know about mod_proxy since I haven't looked at it, but it could happen.
All the framework does is determine that a proxy handler is
Am I right, that by design TC 5 only fully supports one Coyote JK pool
at the moment?
I enabled JMX HTTP adaptor via mx.enabled=true. Obviously
org.apache.jk.common.JkMX tries to initialize the JMX HTTP adaptor not
only once, but for every Coyote JK pool configured in server.xml. For
the
Rainer Jung wrote:
Am I right, that by design TC 5 only fully supports one Coyote JK pool
at the moment?
I enabled JMX HTTP adaptor via mx.enabled=true. Obviously
org.apache.jk.common.JkMX tries to initialize the JMX HTTP adaptor not
only once, but for every Coyote JK pool configured in
Graham Leggett wrote:
Remy Maucherat wrote:
The framework itself could be designed in a way which would end up
hurting performance. It did happen in Tomcat in the past, and I don't
know about mod_proxy since I haven't looked at it, but it could happen.
All the framework does is determine that a
Hi to all,
For jk 1.2.6 the following binaries are allready available :
Windows (ISAPI/JK for AP 1.3.31/JK for AP2 2.0.50)
Linux (JK for Fedora Core 2 Apache 2.0.50, for Suse 8.0 Apache 2.0.50
PPC, for Suse 9.1 Apache 2.0)
Solaris (JK for Apache 1.3.31 EAPI/STANDARD)
iSeries (AS/400 V5R2 and UP)
remm2004/07/26 03:56:55
Modified:catalina/src/share/org/apache/catalina/startup
HostConfig.java ContextConfig.java ExpandWar.java
catalina/src/share/org/apache/catalina/core
StandardContext.java
Log:
- Add logic for
Hi,
This seems fine. I'm a little surprised Tomcat has been using Launcher
all this time without a formal Launcher released ever made, but hey,
life is full of surprises right? ;)
Let me know if you need help from our side. (Saying that with my Tomcat
hat on).
Yoav Shapira
Millennium Research
Hello,
In our web-app that runs with Tomcat 4.1.29 we set the content-type to text/xml in a
servlet that serves an XML file. The XML encoding normally is UTF-8. We observed that
special characters show up wrong in the browser. Packet sniffing revealed that Tomcat
changed the content-type to
Remy Maucherat wrote:
I think very few people are actually using mod_proxy instead of mod_jk.
You've got to back your assertion with some kind of numbers, otherwise
it's FUD.
As do you. The assertion was based on comments on this mailing list, but
we've already established that there is a need
Henri Gomez wrote:
Hi to all,
For jk 1.2.6 the following binaries are allready available :
Windows (ISAPI/JK for AP 1.3.31/JK for AP2 2.0.50)
Linux (JK for Fedora Core 2 Apache 2.0.50, for Suse 8.0 Apache 2.0.50
PPC, for Suse 9.1 Apache 2.0)
Solaris (JK for Apache 1.3.31 EAPI/STANDARD)
iSeries
Graham Leggett wrote:
Remy Maucherat wrote:
I think very few people are actually using mod_proxy instead of
mod_jk. You've got to back your assertion with some kind of numbers,
otherwise it's FUD.
As do you. The assertion was based on comments on this mailing list, but
we've already
Henri Gomez wrote:
Peace on ASF :)
Indeed :)
well mod_ajp will probably goes a bit farther than mod_proxy + proxy_ajp
since mod_proxy will allways relay static configuration, ie map some
knowns URL to knowns Tomcat.
Why would mod_proxy always rely on a static configuration?
Don't forget that a
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30322.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
Am I right, that by design TC 5 only fully supports one Coyote JK pool
at the moment?
I enabled JMX HTTP adaptor via mx.enabled=true. Obviously
org.apache.jk.common.JkMX tries to initialize the JMX HTTP adaptor not
only once, but for every Coyote JK
Graham Leggett wrote:
Henri Gomez wrote:
Peace on ASF :)
Indeed :)
well mod_ajp will probably goes a bit farther than mod_proxy +
proxy_ajp since mod_proxy will allways relay static configuration, ie
map some knowns URL to knowns Tomcat.
Why would mod_proxy always rely on a static
Mladen Turk wrote:
Of course, no one is forced to participate in development, but everyone is
welcome.
The only question is do we have enough juice to make it official.
AFICT, Remy, Henri and myself are in favor.
But frankly I see no reason for someone to object, cause it's open source
after
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30322.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Costin Manolache wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
Of course, no one is forced to participate in development, but
everyone is welcome.
The only question is do we have enough juice to make it official.
AFICT, Remy, Henri and myself are in favor.
But frankly I see no reason for someone
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30324.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30324.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Costin Manolache wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
Of course, no one is forced to participate in development, but
everyone is
welcome. The only question is do we have enough juice to make it
official.
AFICT, Remy, Henri and myself are in favor.
But frankly I see no reason for someone to object, cause
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29831.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Can someone please unsubscribe me from this list? I have sent about 20 email to
unsubscribe and I'm still recieving them.
THanks
Mike Currie
Senior Web Developer
New Century Mortgage
Direct 949 743 7037
Mobile 949 279 4358
Fax 866 281 0360
This electronic message transmission contains
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29826.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Costin Manolache wrote:
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
Am I right, that by design TC 5 only fully supports one Coyote JK
pool at the moment?
I enabled JMX HTTP adaptor via mx.enabled=true. Obviously
org.apache.jk.common.JkMX tries to initialize the JMX HTTP adaptor
not only once, but
yoavs 2004/07/26 08:39:13
Modified:catalina/src/share/org/apache/naming/factory
BeanFactory.java
webapps/docs changelog.xml
Log:
Addressed Bugzilla 29831.
Revision ChangesPath
1.3 +3 -0
remm2004/07/26 08:52:17
Modified:catalina/src/share/org/apache/catalina/loader
WebappClassLoader.java WebappLoader.java
Log:
- Update to use a flag for the anti JAR locking code. It isn't as foolproof as the
other one, since you can't just delete a WAR
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30274.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
remm2004/07/26 08:54:39
Modified:catalina/src/share/org/apache/catalina/startup
ContextConfig.java
Log:
- When using the antiLocking flag, attempt to remove as much of the temp files when
stopping.
- As it was the case before, remove the work dir when
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30279.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Hi all,
I am starting a new thread for this, as it seems to be an important
killer-app feature for any httpd v2.0 integration.
People have said the config should be dynamically configurable - which
part of the config should be dynamically configurable?
In other words, would any of these
Hi,
Why am I included on this list?
Please remove me from the list.
Thanks.
colin
- To
unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Henri Gomez wrote:
Costin Manolache wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
Of course, no one is forced to participate in development, but
everyone is
welcome. The only question is do we have enough juice to make it
official.
AFICT, Remy, Henri and myself are in favor.
But frankly I see no reason for someone
Mladen Turk wrote:
If I make a design flaw, and the entire project gets unusable, it will make
it just something like mod_java, mod_warp, mod_jk and mod_jk2 are... Dead.
Nobody will get hanged for that.
Some code is always better than no code - at best, the code will be good
enough to fit the
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30314.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30279.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30314.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30314.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Graham Leggett wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
If I make a design flaw, and the entire project gets
unusable, it will
make it just something like mod_java, mod_warp, mod_jk and
mod_jk2 are... Dead.
Nobody will get hanged for that.
Some code is always better than no code - at best,
billbarker2004/07/26 10:04:04
Modified:webapps/docs changelog.xml
Log:
Fix version #.
What ever the next version is that is released from here, it is not going to be
called 5.0.x.
Revision ChangesPath
1.78 +1 -1
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Costin Manolache wrote:
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
Am I right, that by design TC 5 only fully supports one Coyote JK
pool at the moment?
I enabled JMX HTTP adaptor via mx.enabled=true. Obviously
org.apache.jk.common.JkMX tries to initialize the JMX HTTP
First, by dynamic updates I mean changes to apache2 config that don't
require a restart. For example, .htaccess files provide such a thing (
for a different area ).
What updates ? There are several forms:
1.
- add a new worker to a pool ( for example - expect big load, you buy
more hardware,
Mladen Turk wrote:
Costin Manolache wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
Of course, no one is forced to participate in development, but
everyone is welcome.
The only question is do we have enough juice to make it official.
AFICT, Remy, Henri and myself are in favor.
But frankly I see no reason for
Henri Gomez wrote:
Costin Manolache wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
Of course, no one is forced to participate in development, but
everyone is
welcome. The only question is do we have enough juice to make it
official.
AFICT, Remy, Henri and myself are in favor.
But frankly I see no reason for someone
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Costin Manolache wrote:
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Costin Manolache wrote:
Both difference and similarity :-).
Eclipse ( osgi actually ) has a similar flat loader implementation,
but with finer control over what is exported/imported and pretty
strong versioning. In addition osgi
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30325.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Henri Gomez wrote:
Costin Manolache wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
Of course, no one is forced to participate in development, but
everyone is
welcome. The only question is do we have enough juice to make it
official.
AFICT, Remy, Henri and myself are in favor.
But frankly I see no reason for someone
I committed a few things:
- The new deployer is getting there. Missing is the support for the
manager webapp, but this won't be too hard to write.
- I redid partially the naming. Now the NamingResource object is the
main object, and Context is not polluted.
My list is:
- Update manager webapp,
jean-frederic clere wrote:
We have noted that mod_proxy + mod_proxy_http are slow compared with
mod_jk.
I think that the next step should be to try to find why instead
writting a new modules. May be a quick hacked mod_proxy_ajp to replace
mod_proxy_http is the first step.
Note that I am a bit
Costin Manolache wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
If I make a design flaw, and the entire project gets
unusable, it will
make it just something like mod_java, mod_warp, mod_jk and
mod_jk2 are... Dead.
Nobody will get hanged for that.
I don't think the goal is to accumulate more
I'll volunteer for the admin webapp stuff. I enjoy deleting stuff from
there ;-).
- Original Message -
From: Remy Maucherat [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Tomcat Developers List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2004 9:27 AM
Subject: Re: [5.next] Progress, more ideas and native connector
- Original Message -
From: Rainer Jung [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2004 3:48 AM
Subject: TC 5: Support for multiple Coyote JK-Pools
Am I right, that by design TC 5 only fully supports one Coyote JK pool
at the moment?
Yes. If at some point we
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30325.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30325.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Mladen Turk wrote:
Costin Manolache wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
If I make a design flaw, and the entire project gets
unusable, it will
make it just something like mod_java, mod_warp, mod_jk and
mod_jk2 are... Dead.
Nobody will get hanged for that.
I don't think the goal is to accumulate more
Costin Manolache wrote:
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Costin Manolache wrote:
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
Am I right, that by design TC 5 only fully supports one Coyote JK
pool at the moment?
I enabled JMX HTTP adaptor via mx.enabled=true. Obviously
org.apache.jk.common.JkMX tries to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
billbarker2004/07/26 10:04:04
Modified:webapps/docs changelog.xml
Log:
Fix version #.
What ever the next version is that is released from here, it is not going to be called 5.0.x.
I did refer to that with the 5.5 revision number, because the API
isn't
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Costin Manolache wrote:
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Costin Manolache wrote:
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
Am I right, that by design TC 5 only fully supports one Coyote JK
pool at the moment?
I enabled JMX HTTP adaptor via mx.enabled=true. Obviously
remm2004/07/26 12:35:00
Modified:catalina/src/conf server-minimal.xml
Log:
- Update server minimal as well.
Revision ChangesPath
1.5 +3 -12 jakarta-tomcat-catalina/catalina/src/conf/server-minimal.xml
Index: server-minimal.xml
Attached is a patch that fixes the get_cookie in jk_lb_worker.c taken
from the CVS today.
The current implementation will fail if there are two JSESSIONID
cookies at different domain levels. My patch below checks a JSESSIONID
value for a known jvmroute before it returns a session cookie.
The
Remy Maucherat wrote:
jean-frederic clere wrote:
We have noted that mod_proxy + mod_proxy_http are slow compared with
mod_jk.
I think that the next step should be to try to find why instead
writting a new modules. May be a quick hacked mod_proxy_ajp to replace
mod_proxy_http is the first step.
I will be out of the office starting 23.07.2004 and will not return until
16.08.2004.
Jeg sjekker mail innimellom. Er det ting rundt drift send mail til
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ha en fortsatt fin dag.
Mvh Richard D. Nilsen
Orkla Media SSIT
Costin Manolache wrote:
1.
- add a new worker to a pool ( for example - expect big load, you buy
more hardware, etc ).
- gracefully remove a worker ( for upgrade for example ) - the
implication is that sticky sessions will still go, no new sessions.
- change parameters of a worker ( like
Costin Manolache wrote:
AFICR you said that you will have something to share, and
I'd love to see
some other, perhaps better ideas.
No, I'm trying stuff on java side.
OK.
And just like with code - I don't think we are missing
propositions or
ideas. What is missing is an
kinman 2004/07/26 13:50:36
Modified:jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/compiler Generator.java
Log:
- Fix 30291: Smap for a tag should not include its body.
- Fix 30289: Incorrect Smap for multiple line java expression.
Revision ChangesPath
1.236 +8 -5
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30289.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30291.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
markt 2004/07/26 14:29:42
Modified:catalina/src/bin setclasspath.sh
Log:
Fix bug 12056. Test for execute rather than read permissions since execute is what
we need.
Add missing JDK not JRE warning.
Revision ChangesPath
1.13 +5 -4
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30331.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30332.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
markt 2004/07/26 15:01:19
Modified:catalina/src/bin setclasspath.sh
Log:
Fix bug 12056. Test for execute rather than read permissions since execute is what
we need.
Add missing JDK not JRE warning.
- Ported from TC4
Revision ChangesPath
1.8 +5 -4
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12056.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30332.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
why are we so focused on dynamic this dynamic that, there is nothing about
mod_proxy that is dynamic, and instead of delaying the stability and release
of a working mod_proxy with a load balancer, make it work, make it work
well, then add fancy features. mod_jk2 became way to cluttered this exact
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30340.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Mladen Turk wrote:
Well, the way I see (think that Henri has the similar ideas) is to have the
ajp protocol lib, usable to communicate to TC from any container, not only
http server, and mod_ajp as a layer on top of it _only_ for Apache 2.0
branch _and_only_ if the proxy_ajp doesn't get back
86 matches
Mail list logo
