Re: svn commit: r1738292 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 6:32 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > It was working, in the sense that it had the intended effect (the [un]define > took effect) in the broader global context. > > This is a breaking change to some potentially existing configs, however > misguided they are, which is the sort of thing we've avoided in the released > branch. > > Could we log an error rather than preventing startup? One issue is that > these directives are encountered prior to opening the error log file. One > possible fix would be to have a second directive handler with the sole > purpose of emitting errors, running at the normal processing scope, and > not within exec_on_read. This seems to work inside a directive handler on unix and ends up in the console: ap_log_perror(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_STARTUP, 0, cmd->pool > > This shouldn't be allowed to fester on trunk, obviously, but for 2.4 it > seems > like something we shouldn't alter, no matter how much it frustrates users > who used this unintentionally. That's fair, I don't remember if I intentionally or unintentionally didn't propose it immediately.
Re: svn commit: r1738292 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
It was working, in the sense that it had the intended effect (the [un]define took effect) in the broader global context. This is a breaking change to some potentially existing configs, however misguided they are, which is the sort of thing we've avoided in the released branch. Could we log an error rather than preventing startup? One issue is that these directives are encountered prior to opening the error log file. One possible fix would be to have a second directive handler with the sole purpose of emitting errors, running at the normal processing scope, and not within exec_on_read. This shouldn't be allowed to fester on trunk, obviously, but for 2.4 it seems like something we shouldn't alter, no matter how much it frustrates users who used this unintentionally. On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:52 PM, wrote: > Author: covener > Date: Fri Apr 8 19:52:19 2016 > New Revision: 1738292 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1738292&view=rev > Log: > confused IRC user hit this in 2.4 > > > Modified: > httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS > > Modified: httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS > URL: > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS?rev=1738292&r1=1738291&r2=1738292&view=diff > > == > --- httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS (original) > +++ httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS Fri Apr 8 19:52:19 2016 > @@ -175,6 +175,15 @@ PATCHES PROPOSED TO BACKPORT FROM TRUNK: > 2.4.x patch: trunk patch works (compatibility note to be adjusted) > +1: jailletc36 > > + *) core: block Define and Undefine in vhost and directory context. > Because > + it is EXEC_ON_READ, it "breaks out" of these contexts anyway. > + trunk patch: http://svn.apache.org/r1656063 > + http://svn.apache.org/r1656122 > + 2.4.x patch: > http://people.apache.org/~covener/patches/2.4.x-define-limits.diff > + > + +1: covener (I need to review the docs manually in this area) > + > + > PATCHES/ISSUES THAT ARE BEING WORKED > >*) http: Don't remove the Content-Length of zero from a HEAD response if > > >
Re: [RESULT] Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.20 as GA
Thanks, Jim! > Am 08.04.2016 um 17:25 schrieb Jim Jagielski : > > With >= 3 +1 (binding) votes and many +1 non-binding votes, > I call this vote CLOSED with the result of the vote PASSING. > > I will start the xfer to mirrors in prep for an announcement > on Monday. > > Thx to all testers and contributors! > >> On Apr 4, 2016, at 12:20 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >> The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.20 can be found >> at the usual place: >> >>http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ >> >> I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.20 GA. >> >> [ ] +1: Good to go >> [ ] +0: meh >> [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why. >> >> Vote will last the normal 72 hrs. >> >> NOTE: The *-deps are only there for convenience. >> >> Thx! >
Re: proxy API compat break in 2.4.7
Ahh... yes, for 3rd party modules depending on mod_proxy, or using mod_proxy, they would need to be recompiled. Ideally, we should have put these at the end of the struct as we do with the more "major" structs. > On Apr 7, 2016, at 2:09 PM, Rainer Jung wrote: > > Revision 1560081 (backport of r1533087) introduced "char > uds_path[PROXY_WORKER_MAX_NAME_SIZE]" in the middle of the > proxy_worker_shared structure which IMHO broke compatibility between 2.4.6 > and 2.4.7. > > I noticed it just now, because I was implementing a custom LB method and > during runtime it always found s->status to be 0. I had compiled it against > an old 2.4.4 to ensure not using later features, but was testing inside > 2.4.18. Thus the offset of the status field calculated for 2.4.4 actually > pointed into the long uds_path string which wasn't used and probably calloced > with zeroes. > > Any good idea how to best document the break for other module developers? > > Regards, > > Rainer
Re: proxy API compat break in 2.4.7
> On Apr 7, 2016, at 6:55 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Rainer Jung wrote: >> Revision 1560081 (backport of r1533087) introduced "char >> uds_path[PROXY_WORKER_MAX_NAME_SIZE]" in the middle of the >> proxy_worker_shared structure which IMHO broke compatibility between 2.4.6 >> and 2.4.7. > > Possibly [1] (currently proposed for backport) may cause the same issue. > We should probably fix it (ie. move the new fields to the end of > proxy_worker_shared) to make it backportable... > Yep, will need to adjust the patch.
[RESULT] Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.20 as GA
With >= 3 +1 (binding) votes and many +1 non-binding votes, I call this vote CLOSED with the result of the vote PASSING. I will start the xfer to mirrors in prep for an announcement on Monday. Thx to all testers and contributors! > On Apr 4, 2016, at 12:20 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.20 can be found > at the usual place: > > http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ > > I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.20 GA. > > [ ] +1: Good to go > [ ] +0: meh > [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why. > > Vote will last the normal 72 hrs. > > NOTE: The *-deps are only there for convenience. > > Thx!
Re: proxy API compat break in 2.4.7
On 04/07/2016 09:36 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > The first most important documentation of this should be in ap_mmn.h, > as we've done in the past (you'll see some highlights). > > A note under the CHANGES entry for 2.4.7 seems worthwhile. > > Pointing this out under Announcement seems appropriate, that users > of third party mod_proxy-consuming modules will need to recompile > those modules when upgrading from 2.4.1 - 2.4.6. > > I can't think of another obvious place, other than any related doxygen. > > It seems to late to correct this situation, as half the world will benefit > from leaving things as they are, and the other half of the world would > have an easier time migrating from 2.4.early to 2.4.now. Lose lose > situation in my mind, so best to leave as-is, with docs. +1 Regards Rüdiger
