dgaudet     99/06/04 09:49:14

  Modified:    .        STATUS
  Log:
  a sunny day here
  
  Revision  Changes    Path
  1.698     +5 -15     apache-1.3/STATUS
  
  Index: STATUS
  ===================================================================
  RCS file: /home/cvs/apache-1.3/STATUS,v
  retrieving revision 1.697
  retrieving revision 1.698
  diff -u -r1.697 -r1.698
  --- STATUS    1999/06/04 16:37:58     1.697
  +++ STATUS    1999/06/04 16:49:10     1.698
  @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
     1.3 STATUS:
  -  Last modified at [$Date: 1999/06/04 16:37:58 $]
  +  Last modified at [$Date: 1999/06/04 16:49:10 $]
   
   Release:
   
  @@ -95,7 +95,7 @@
   
       * Ralf's [PATCH] to add EAPI (ctx, hook, mm, etc.) to the base package
        Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  -     Status: Jim +1, Mark +1, Dean -0, BenH +1
  +     Status: Jim +1, Mark +1, Dean +1, BenH +1
   
       * Tony Finch's patch to support mass virtual hosting
        Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  @@ -115,11 +115,11 @@
       * Aidan Cully's patch to allow assignment of 'ownership' of resources
         to either the server UID or the file's owner.
        Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  -     Status: Ken +1
  +     Status: Ken +1, Dean +1
   
       * John Giannadrea's patch for ceiling on file size for mmap (PR#4122)
        Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  -     Status: Ken +1
  +     Status: Ken +1, Dean +1
   
       * Keith Wannamaker's NT multiple services patch
        Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  @@ -175,6 +175,7 @@
                         please review the shared memory deep-level code.
                   Doug: +1 on concept (untested)
                   Lars: +1 on concept
  +             Dean: isn't this superceded by EAPI?
   
       * Mark Bixby's freshening up the MPE/iX port (mostly APACI)
        Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  @@ -251,17 +252,6 @@
   
       * general/3787: SERVER_PORT is always 80 if client comes to any port
         => needs review by the protocol guys, I think.
  -
  -    * Someone other than Dean has to do a security/correctness review on
  -      psprintf(), bprintf(), and ap_snprintf().  In particular these routines
  -      do lots of fun pointer manipulations and such and possibly have 
overflow
  -      errors.  The respective flush_funcs also need to be exercised.
  -       o Jim's looked over the ap_snprintf() stuff (the changes that Dean
  -         did to make thread-safe) and they look fine.
  -       o Laura La Gassa's looked over ap_vformatter & other related code
  -       o Martin did a "source review" as well.
  -       o Could still use 1 or 2 more sets of eyeballs.
  -       Status: Is this still valid??
   
       * Paul would like to see a 'gdbm' option because he uses
         it a lot.
  
  
  

Reply via email to