Sounds borked... care to offer a patch to dev@httpd?
Bill
At 11:41 AM 7/2/2002, you wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Just wondering why the query for the AP_MPMQ_MAX_DAEMONS return 0
>instead of IMO 1?
>I mean there is on child after all, and I cannot use the
>find_child_by_pid.
>
>We are using that in mod_jk2, a
At 12:02 PM 7/6/2002, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> > What is a dynamic page if
not a PHP page?
>
> Like I said, Apache doesn't know if a file on disk is meant for PHP
or
> not. The best way to fix this would be for mod_php to set the
value if
> the filter is added for the request.
>
> I agree, it woul
Still too much backlogged mail... should have gone here
instead;
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2002 12:12:50
-0500
To: Aaron Bannert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: PATH_INFO in A2?
At 11:41 AM 7/8/2002, Aaron Bannert
At 12:18 PM 7/9/2002, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> > I'm going to do a start the T&R process on thursday for a 2.0.40 release
> > so if you've got things which you want in there and are stable
> > (apr_poll) comes to mind please commit them.
> >
> > Ian
>
>I'll try to run a profile on the new apr_poll
At 01:40 PM 7/9/2002, you wrote:
>This patch sets the calls to OpenSCManager and OpenService to use the
>minimum required privileges.
Cool. Could you cvs up to grab the latest version with Mladen's patch,
compare your suggested changes to his latest changes for requested
privileges, and provide
At 07:27 PM 7/9/2002, you wrote:
>Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like you think this is for
>ApacheMonitor. This is for the winnt mpm itself.
>I thought your patch this morning was for the mpm just as I believe you
>think this is for the monitor.
Yup... That would be it.
Thanks for th
At 07:29 AM 7/10/2002, you wrote:
>This defines macros similar to the AP_ counterparts in ap_config.h. I
>was playing with a new proxy hook and optionally implementing the hook
>in a non-proxy module when I encountered the need to use APR_ hook
>macros to make it work.
>
>It would seem to be cons
At 11:22 AM 7/10/2002, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 10 Jul 2002, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> >
> > > > user foo" checks. 'require group' can stay in mod_auth or
> > > > go into a mod_auth_group.
> > >
> > > Didn't we decide to take this a
At 12:07 PM 7/10/2002, Aaron Bannert wrote:
>On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 09:39:29AM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > I'm sorry, but that is completely bogus. If the API needs to change to
> > make things better, then change the API. Stop trying to open a new dev
> > branch when the current one is still
At 12:54 PM 7/10/2002, you wrote:
> That's the responsibility of Windows. By forcing admin privileges to call
>apache -k * isn't creating any kind of security. Anybody could create a
>simple
>five like program or open up services from the control panel to control apache
>if their account has t
At 12:56 PM 7/10/2002, Aaron Bannert wrote:
>On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 10:44:46AM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > I still believe that everything that is currently in ROADMAP can and
> > should be implemented in 2.0.
>
>And my point is we won't know until there is a patch that solves
>one of the roadma
I'm sort of dubious on the whole 'retain blank headers' bit. If we put
them into the request_headers list, many modules might barf when
they encounter them.
Is it possible, by the protocol, to consider blank headers a noop,
and simply not store them in the request headers array?
E.g. no value [e
At 04:27 PM 7/10/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On Wed, 10 Jul 2002, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
>
> > Dirk, since you're working on a patch for Auth, would it be possible to
> have
> > the groups list somewhere in the request structure? It would be great with
> > web applications, where we can match
At 02:21 AM 7/1/2002, you wrote:
>Quick patch to bring some old docs up-to-date.
Do we even care to freshen these? Seems like it's about time to
kill this bird.
Bill
>--
>James Cox :: [EMAIL PROTECTED] :: Landonize It! http://landonize.it/
>Was I helpful? http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/w
At 11:49 AM 7/11/2002, you wrote:
>Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> >
> > I don't believe that mod_include would want AcceptPathInfo on.
>
>Um, why not? I know of SSIs that use the path-info..
But not by default. That would be the exception, not the rule.
The idea is to avoid namespace recursion, and
At 03:32 PM 7/11/2002, you wrote:
>Ryan Bloom wrote:
> >
> > I'm sorry, but that is completely bogus. If the API needs to change to
> > make things better, then change the API.
>
>I disagree. *Changing* the API is the bogus aspect. *Enhancing*
>it so that new split auth/authz functionality is a
At 03:52 PM 7/11/2002, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
>"William A. Rowe, Jr." wrote:
> >
> > At 02:21 AM 7/1/2002, you wrote:
> > >Quick patch to bring some old docs up-to-date.
> >
> > Do we even care to freshen these? Seems like it's about time
At 03:56 PM 7/11/2002, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
>"William A. Rowe, Jr." wrote:
> >
> > But not by default. That would be the exception, not the rule.
> > The idea is to avoid namespace recursion, and unlike CGIs, most
> > folks don't look at PA
At 02:51 AM 7/14/2002, you wrote:
>Currently, the content-length filter attempts to compute the length
>of the entire response before passing any data on to the next filter,
>and it sets request_rec->bytes_sent to the computed content-length.
>
> * r->bytes_sent is used by mod_log_config as a co
At 02:51 AM 7/14/2002, you wrote:
>Currently, the content-length filter attempts to compute the length
>of the entire response before passing any data on to the next filter,
>and it sets request_rec->bytes_sent to the computed content-length.
The real answer is simple. C-L filter should only set
At 10:03 PM 7/14/2002, Ryan Bloom wrote:
>BTW, this whole conversation started because we wanted to speed up
>Apache. Has anybody considered taking a completely different tack to
>solve this problem?
>
>I know there is a patent on this, but I am willing to ignore it, and I
>am pretty sure that w
At 02:59 AM 7/15/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>brianp 2002/07/15 00:59:31
>
> Modified:modules/metadata mod_unique_id.c
> Log:
> Remove a time lookup that's now unnecessary
Correction; that was never necessary. I know I forgot to go back and
review something that looked odd. T
At 03:16 AM 7/15/2002, Brian Pane wrote:
> > -apr_sleep(apr_time_from_sec(1));
> > +apr_sleep(apr_time_from_sec(1) - apr_time_now());
>
>The result of that subtraction is roughly negative one billion.
No more commits for me tonight :-)
At 12:09 PM 7/15/2002, you wrote:
> Should the Win32 version of poll.c in the network_io directory be
>removed from CVS? If Win32 still uses there own version, shouldn't it
>be moved to poll/win32?
We may, or may not want a custom poll based on Rbb's new design.
I didn't remove this code simpl
At 07:23 PM 7/15/2002, Ryan Bloom wrote:
>We could force the size, by using apr_int32_t. The problem that he is
>having, is that pointers on _most_ 64-bit machines (Windows is a notable
>exception, there may be others), are 64-bits long. But we are using
>int's, which are 32-bits for the pointe
Unlikely. I recently discovered that the input filtering changes have
completely corrupted mod_isapi.c.
Since r->remaining is entirely invalid now, that code [conventional,
safe and traditional module authoring style] is totally borked.
Looks like a couple days before it can be fixed.
Bill
A
At 07:09 PM 7/16/2002, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>On Tue, Jul 16, 2002 at 06:33:08PM -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> > Unlikely. I recently discovered that the input filtering changes have
> > completely corrupted mod_isapi.c.
> >
> > Since r->remaining is e
At 12:03 PM 7/17/2002, Mark Nelson wrote:
>Is Apache 1.3.26 safe to build/run on 64 bit Windows platforms?
As a 32 bit app? Yes.
Short of that, it has many, many problems building on Win64.
We aren't investing any further effort [aside from bug fixes] for
the 1.3/win32 port. The Win64 effort
Attached is a patch that should allow ap_get_brigade() modules to
determine EOS on the same roundtrip as the last read of the request
body contents.
Right now, the caller won't receive an EOS. Coupled with our useless
r->remaining req_rec member, there is no way to determine if there is
no data
At 08:33 PM 7/17/2002, Greg Ames wrote:
>...since Wednesday, 17-Jul-2002 18:49:31 PDT . Things look fine now, but we
>took about a 3 1/2 minute site outage because of:
>
>[Wed Jul 17 18:47:20 2002] [error] (2)No such file or directory: could not
>open mime types config file /usr/local/apache/conf
At 01:39 AM 7/18/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>wrowe 2002/07/17 23:39:06
> Revision ChangesPath
> 1.49 +134 -154 httpd-2.0/libhttpd.dsp
David... I knocked out the header you pointed out, along with a number
of duplicated entries for the headers we now move about into includ
At 05:31 AM 7/18/2002, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>"William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>Previously, foo-std.conf would always be copied but foo.conf wouldn't
>be overlaid. That was a nice feature.
[on win32, we are using .default.conf at the moment.
At 01:23 PM 7/18/2002, David Shane Holden wrote:
> - Cleans up the garbled output.
>- Fixes a few grammatical errors and incorrect path information.
Cool, thanks.
>- Removes building from .mak files.
Ugh. -1 ... you eliminate the ability for VC5 users to build these modules.
VC5 never suppor
At 10:21 AM 7/22/2002, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
>Obviously this can be done with piped logging, but I consider that a
>bit of a handwave. It appears that here really isn't any simple way
>to accomplish what seems to actually be a reasonable thing. It can be
>worked around with ErrorDocumen
At 06:12 PM 7/28/2002, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>On Sun, Jul 28, 2002 at 08:35:13PM +0200, Graham Leggett wrote:
> > Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> >
> > >In the past, people have suggested a CPAN/PEAR-approach where
> > >modules are downloaded when needed.
> >
> > Modules in source form or binary for
At 08:15 AM 7/29/2002, you wrote:
>Seperating out the routines that run only in the child (and putting them in
>child.c) is not a bad thing but this patch is difficult to review for
>several reasons:
>
>1. The commit log did not mention the biggest change. Easy to intuit looking
>at the code, but
At 12:29 PM 7/29/2002, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
>Ryan Bloom wrote:
> >
> > Mod_proxy wasn't added back to the server until the developers had
> > proven that there was a development community around it, and most
> > of the bugs had been fixed. The same must be true for ldap before
> > it can
At 02:25 PM 8/1/2002, you wrote:
>On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Sander Striker wrote:
>
> > > Is "apr-iconv" required now when building from CVS on Linux?
> >
> > No, only for win32 builds.
>
>For the record, I think it's a terrible idea to just sort of sneak this in
>there (in as much as it came to a huge
At 09:07 AM 8/1/2002, you wrote:
> > The workaround that I put in yesterday will suffice for most
> > installations, but we'll need to revert to the previous poll
> > code in order to have a GA-ready server once again.
>
>Then remind me again why we're having a .40 release? If the only crietria is
At 11:15 AM 8/1/2002, you wrote:
>Because there always seems to be one more person saying "ooh ooh wait for
>this one last thing" and the group is too afraid to do a dead-end branch.
Because they are time consuming, and wasteful?
The security incident we are discussing [which is not published] i
At 11:42 AM 8/1/2002, you wrote:
>ianh2002/08/01 09:42:33
>
> Modified:buildhttpd_roll_release
> Log:
> we need apr-iconv now
Even if we don't build it, this is extremely good practice that the folks
rolling and releasing the tarball TAG the apr-iconv tree in sync with
the c
At 03:32 PM 8/1/2002, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > From: William A. Rowe, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >
> > At 11:42 AM 8/1/2002, you wrote:
> > >ianh2002/08/01 09:42:33
> > >
> > > Modified:buildhttpd_roll_release
> > >
At 07:01 PM 8/2/2002, Ian Holsman wrote:
>William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>>At 03:32 PM 8/1/2002, Ryan Bloom wrote:
>>> > From: William A. Rowe, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>> > At 11:42 AM 8/1/2002, you wrote:
>>> > >ianh2002/08/01
CVS Head as of right now [after I fixed my dropped-lead-digit bug in the
apr_strtoi64()]...
Trying to serve a pdf, I added \"%{Range}i\" to my access log format just to see what
the
browser is requesting... the Range header request is for;
bytes=4096-
bytes=287090-288113, 279922-287089, 65536
At 08:31 PM 8/9/2002, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>>Cool. I believe something is better than nothing :).
>>
>>(I'm sure you're already aware of this - but thought it'd be better to let
>>you know)
>>I believe my patch went into r1.127 - and has been labelled for the 2.0.40
>>release. So, you might want
At 11:14 AM 8/12/2002, Cliff Woolley wrote:
>The .msi and .exe installers for 2.0.40 are borked... lots of default
>stuff (license, etc), and the registry keys created are apparently for
>2.0.39 instead of 2.0.40 (or so says one of the several PR's on the
>matter).
This was my fault, entirely, s
At 03:04 PM 8/15/2002, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 11:51:52AM -0700, Ian Holsman wrote:
> > it's not as obvious, the proposal above forces the developer to say
> > "i verify my module will work with threaded"
>
>No, I'd much prefer that modules code their own checks for it.
At 09:41 AM 8/16/2002, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
>We had this discussion elsewhere, but just for the record..
>
>Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> >
> > And, my point back to you is that should be part of the documentation
> > of the module NOT of httpd-2.0.
>
>IMNSHO, that is *such* BS. If someone
At 10:21 AM 8/16/2002, Bill Stoddard wrote:
>A remarkable number of software developers are really ignorant about
>programming in a threaded environment and I know from first hand experience
>with newbie software developers that it is really difficult for some people
>to grok that even a one instr
>From: Auriemma Luigi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Organization: PivX
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Apache 2.0.39 directory traversal and path disclosure bug
>Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 17:01:29 +
>
>##
>
>Auriemma Luigi, PivX securit
>Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 11:39:04 -0500
>To: Auriemma Luigi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: Apache 2.0.39 directory traversal and path disclosure bug
>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>At 12:01 PM 8/16/200
The following bug was found to affect all platforms and is fixed in 2.0.40
as part of the CAN-2002-0654 incident;
>Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 15:27:03 -0700
>From: Jim Race <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Security regression in 2.0.39 (Win32)?
>
>In previous versions of 2.0.n, th
Don't we -already- have some argv parsing code in either proc.c or the mod_cgi
that could be used for this purpose??? Let's make that exported, accessible
code from apr itself.
Bill
At 03:31 PM 8/19/2002, Paul J. Reder wrote:
>After fixing the parse_cmd code to be able to handle escaped quotes
At 06:53 AM 8/21/2002, Joe Schaefer wrote:
>Jeff Trawick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Joe Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > The apreq developers would like to see apreq-2 [*]
> > > make its way into the apache 2 distribution. Here's why:
> >
> > Did you consider adding it to apr
Just a quick observation.
The fact that the input filtering schema is a bit clumsy for apreq
is a perfect example of WHY we should incorporate apreq into
the Apache core. Without a good use case, input filters will
never become as polished as they aught to be.
Bill
At 10:01 AM 8/21/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On 21 Aug 2002, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>
> > Joe Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > The apreq developers would like to see apreq-2 [*]
> > > make its way into the apache 2 distribution. Here's why:
> >
> > Did you consider adding it to apr
At 07:53 AM 8/27/2002, Peter Van Biesen wrote:
>What should I call it then ? not-so-tiny-files ? 8-)
Nah... large or big files is just fine :-)
I'm guessing $$$s to OOOs [donuts] that your client is starting
some byteranges somewhere along the way. Try adding the bit
\"%{Range}i\" in one of yo
proxy: headerline
>= Transfer-Encoding: chunked
>[Wed Aug 28 10:30:04 2002] [debug] proxy_http.c(893): proxy: start body
>send
>[Wed Aug 28 10:36:23 2002] [notice] child pid 7534 exit signal
>Segmentation fault (11)
>
>I'm installing gdb, as you can see ;-)
>
>Peter.
At 07:06 AM 8/28/2002, Graham Leggett wrote:
>Peter Van Biesen wrote:
>
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0xc1bfb06c in apr_bucket_alloc () from /opt/httpd/lib/libaprutil.sl.0
(gdb) where
#0 0xc1bfb06c in apr_bucket_alloc () from
/opt/httpd/lib/libaprutil.sl
At 11:54 AM 8/29/2002, Jess M. Holle wrote:
>Jason Kissinger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) responded:
>
>>Windows clients hitting Solaris servers does not exhibit this problem.
>>Only Solaris clients hitting Windows servers. I'm unsure if other UN*X
>>have this problem, Linux and Windows does not. And S
At 04:07 PM 8/29/2002, you wrote:
client: SunOS 5.8 Generic_108528-15 sun4u sparc SUNW,Sun-Blade-1000
>test1: wget http://w2k/8mbfile == 80KB/s
>test2: wget http://w2k/webapp/8mbfile == 1MB/s
>
>client: Linux 2.4.18-3smp
>test1: wget http://w2k/8mbfile == 8MB/s
>test2: wget http://w2k/webapp/8mb
At 01:48 AM 8/30/2002, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>Since no one had any feedback to the earlier posts about splitting
>the auth modules into authn/authz, I decided to just call it authn
>(old auth) and authz (what Dirk called access).
>
>http://www.apache.org/~jerenkrantz/new-aaa/aaa-authn-authz-spl
At 10:09 AM 8/30/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
> > ... Now that it's GA, we should really be treating the 2.0 tree
> > with the same respect and caution we use on the 1.3 tree.
> >
> > It's time for
At 10:43 AM 8/30/2002, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 09:54:45AM -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> > It's time for a 2.1-dev tree, if we want to be playing with new ideas,
> guys.
> > If they test out clean and don't break compatibility [in any s
At 04:22 PM 8/30/2002, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>Ian Holsman wrote:
> >
> > what we need most is a stable tree for a couple of months not spliting
> > out to a 2.1 tree
>
>++1
So... for the next couple months, we grind new ideas and development
to a halt (as things were when I got here in the spring
At 04:28 PM 8/30/2002, Marc Slemko wrote:
>On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, Ian Holsman wrote:
>
> > exactly,
> > this talk of 2.1/branching etc is very premature.
> > if you think your going to destablize the tree, then do your changes on
> > a copy of the file.. and when your done just overwrite the old one
At 02:00 PM 9/3/2002, Jon Travis wrote:
>Either one is fine to me. Integrating the code into apr-util is probably
>an easier setup, but will require more work to adapt to the build system
>and change the symbols (and of course I'm quite liking the name
>'el-kabong' ;-)).
That's sort of the conce
At 11:59 AM 9/4/2002, Brian Pane wrote:
>Aaron Bannert wrote:
>
>>On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 06:06:59PM +0200, Graham Leggett wrote:
>>
>>>Is it possible to read brigades from two filter stacks simultaneously?
>>
>>No, and the need for multiplexed brigade read/writes has been
>>brought up before, but
At 01:43 PM 9/6/2002, Sander Striker wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I hereby volunteer to be RM for 2.0.41. (tag this weekend).
>Objections?
If we say Monday it gives us time to...
1) shake out the new docs nits that folks are raising [and the docs
folks are fixing unbelievably quickly!!!] That's going to
At 02:20 PM 9/6/2002, Greg Stein wrote:
>On Fri, Sep 06, 2002 at 02:12:10PM -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> >...
> > There are a few other little bugs that I'd like to fix so that 2.0.41
> > holds most folks for a month or few. I have no objection if you simply
At 11:27 AM 9/6/2002, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>Aaron Bannert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Fri, Sep 06, 2002 at 11:55:17AM -0400, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> > > Though we probably don't want to be in the business of pretending to
> > > support C++ modules in general, they certainly work with Apache
At 03:58 PM 9/6/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On Fri, 6 Sep 2002, Dale Ghent wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 6 Sep 2002, Greg Stein wrote:
> >
> > | You can always do a 2.0.42 next week if you'd like.
> >
> > argh, we have to remember... Apache 2.0 is GA, not beta!
>
>No, it is not. Apache 2.0.40 is GA.
Sander (& Co)
with .40, we backed out the apr-iconv due to it's not-ready state,
with the attached patch.
I've been intending to get the openssl/iconv/zlib library linkage stubs
done for Win32, but my time's been rather short. I should be able
to attack it late this week or early next wee
At 01:36 AM 9/10/2002, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 03:00:51AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > jerenkrantz2002/09/09 20:00:50
> >
> > Modified:.CHANGES
> >support htpasswd.c
> > Log:
> > Add ability to htpasswd (via -5) to produce non
At 12:24 PM 9/10/2002, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 11:57:08AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I agree with Bill. Please revert this commit. The problem is that
>
>And, I think there is power in giving the user the choice to have
>correct MD5 hashes produced. Not every
At 10:58 AM 9/10/2002, Cyrille Artho wrote:
>Hi,
>as someone who works on multi-threaded problems, but not Apache,
>I ran into your page at
>http://httpd.apache.org/docs-2.0/developer/thread_safety.html
>
>I strongly suggest to revise it, because it lacks depth.
Please, edit the .html however you
At 11:46 PM 9/16/2002, Stephen R Smoot wrote:
>In message
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Wouldn't it be a good idea for us to put out an advisory to the usual
> > places (announce@...) summarizing all the recent security stuff including
> > the openssl worm (commonly called an "apache worm")? Neither
I was thinking about this. What about -eliminating- the mod_authn_default
and mod_authz_default, merging them into mod_auth, and moving the
directives from mod_auth_basic and mod_auth_digest into the common
mod_auth.
Mod_auth would further include all of the hooks, and be the common
module that
At 12:04 PM 9/17/2002, Ian Holsman wrote:
>On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 10:00:44 -0700, rbb wrote:
> > On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> >> Mod_auth would further include all of the hooks, and be the common
> >> module that all other mod_auth_foo, auth
At 01:59 PM 9/17/2002, Sander Striker wrote:
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: 17 September 2002 20:44
>
> >>> I would also recommend a new tarball with the timestamp tweaked.
> Something
> >>> like so:
> >>>
> >>> $ tar xzf httpd-tar.gz
> >>> $ touch .../ssl_ex
At 10:05 AM 9/19/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>+1 for .42
Agreed here, no signs of trouble.
>And to make it official, .41 should be classified as an alpha release.
All tarballs rolled are Alpha until otherwise released as Beta candidates,
which remain Beta candidates until they are released a
I'll do you one better, in httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
apache_2.0.42-win32-x86-no_ssl.exe 20-Sep-2002 17:06 6.5M
apache_2.0.42-win32-x86-no_ssl.msi 20-Sep-2002 16:52 3.5M
httpd-2.0.42-alpha-win32-src.zip 19-Sep-2002 08:19 6.4M
Replete with .md5 and .pgp sums.
Thanks for all your efforts getting
At 09:06 PM 9/24/2002, Greg Stein wrote:
>I believe the solution is to create a new CGI bucket type. The read()
>function would read from stdout, similar to a normal PIPE bucket (e.g.
>create a new HEAP bucket with the results). However, the bucket *also* holds
>the stderr pipe from the CGI scrip
At 03:18 AM 8/23/2002, Peter Van Biesen wrote:
>Hello,
>
>frequently I get error messages like :
>
>[Fri Aug 23 10:00:34 2002] [error] [client 193.53.20.96] no acceptable
>variant: /opt/httpd/error/HTTP_NOT_FOUND.html.var, refe[etc]
>
>Would it be possible to include in the logmessage wich variant
At 01:29 PM 7/21/2002, Adrian Grajdeanu wrote:
>The fact that URLs are case sensitive by definition is a strong argument.
>Unfortunately the reality of case insensitive file systems doesn't fit with
>definitions. I guess people already went on and debated this till the bitter
>end. So instead of
Why did you principally credit Sander van Zoest for submitting the
patch of Michael Radwin ?
Bill
At 06:22 PM 9/25/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>dirkx 2002/09/25 16:22:34
>
> Modified:src CHANGES
> src/modules/standard mod_headers.c
> Log:
> Scratch another
At 03:03 AM 9/26/2002, Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
>On Wed, 25 Sep 2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
>> Why did you principally credit Sander van Zoest for submitting the
>> patch of Michael Radwin ?
>
>Darn - not intentionally - I wanted to separate who wrote it and
At 01:12 PM 10/1/2002, Greg Stein wrote:
>For PHP, we said "make it a filter [so the source can come from anywhere]".
>I think we really should have said "for GET requests, allow it to be
>processed by PHP." The POST, PROPFIND, COPY, etc should all be possible to handle by
>PHP, which means that
At 03:27 PM 10/1/2002, Ryan Bloom wrote:
>On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
>> At 01:12 PM 10/1/2002, Greg Stein wrote:
>> >For PHP, we said "make it a filter [so the source can come from anywhere]".
>> >I think we really should hav
At 03:27 PM 10/1/2002, Paul J. Reder wrote:
>Ryan Bloom wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, Paul J. Reder wrote:
>>
>>>I've been working on the caching code and ran across a core dump...
>>>
>>>A particular file contains an SSI call to a cgi. The cgi causes a pipe
>>>bucket to pass down the chain. cac
At 05:19 PM 10/1/2002, Greg Stein wrote:
>On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 01:32:16PM -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>> At 01:12 PM 10/1/2002, Greg Stein wrote:
>>...
>> One of my itches that I haven't had time yet to scratch is to implement
>> the apreq filter to expo
Since all of these issues are now public, I'm moving the discussion over
to the dev list.
First, +1 to the patch below. With nothing else put forward, this
is the patch that will go into 2.0.43
I've already moved it to apply_to_2.0.42 since, after the public
disclosure, there is nothing standi
At 11:11 PM 10/1/2002, Jerry Baker wrote:
>Currently, authentication is broken with the standard Windows config file and current
>HEAD. Where is the documentation on the complete mess-up of the auth modules and how
>to get it working again?
The documentation is not complete, nor hooked up into
If someone reverts that -part- of the commit, and changes CHANGES
to reflect this group decision, I will bring in that commit tomorrow a.m.
before the final tag and roll.
Sorry if I wasn't clear on the consensus decision. +1.
Bill
At 05:54 PM 10/2/2002, Joshua Slive wrote:
>On Wed, 2 Oct 2002
YES!
The pattern is:
(and .htaccess'es within those directories)
with the s parsed in the appropriate container.
We repeat because the original could
have changed in translate_name, and yes, the URI permissions
or restrictions always override any file-based permissions.
E
At 06:23 PM 10/2/2002, Greg Stein wrote:
>On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 07:10:32PM -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>> At 05:19 PM 10/1/2002, Greg Stein wrote:
>>...
>> >As long as it is understood that only *one* thing can consume the request
>> >body. Then the ques
At 10:22 PM 10/2/2002, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>Output filters cannot handle methods -- only input filters can do that.
>It sounds to me like you guys are just arguing past each other -- the
>architecture is broken, not the individual modules. Just fix it.
>
>Greg is right -- the default handler i
for testing from http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ in your preferred
.tar.gz, .tar.Z or -win32-src.zip format (-win32-src.zip containing
the msvc makefiles.)
We expect to release this image due to two minor security
exposures sometime around noon PDT today, Oct 3rd.
Your participation in testing
27;t. That might confuse a few people...
>
>Bojan
>
>Quoting "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> for testing from http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ in your preferred
>> .tar.gz, .tar.Z or -win32-src.zip format (-win32-src.zip containing
>> t
he current tide.
Bill
At 08:43 AM 10/3/2002, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>"William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> for testing from http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ in your preferred
>> .tar.gz, .tar.Z or -win32-src.zip format (-win32-src.zip containing
&g
401 - 500 of 6469 matches
Mail list logo
