Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.3 as GA
A reminder: The vote closes in 2 hours. So far, plenty of +1s (binding and non) and no -1s (or +/-0) On Aug 17, 2012, at 1:34 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote: The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.3 can be found at the usual place: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.3 GA. NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part of the official release. [ ] +1: Good to go [ ] +0: meh [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why. Vote will last the normal 72 hrs.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.3 as GA
On 17 Aug 2012, at 7:34 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.3 can be found at the usual place: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.3 GA. NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part of the official release. [X] +1: Good to go [ ] +0: meh [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why. Vote will last the normal 72 hrs. +1 on FC17, built as an RPM. Regards, Graham -- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.3 as GA
Am 17.08.2012 19:34, schrieb Jim Jagielski: The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.3 can be found at the usual place: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.3 GA. NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part of the official release. [ ] +1: Good to go [ ] +0: meh [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why. Vote will last the normal 72 hrs. +1 on NetWare.
[RESULT] Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.3 as GA
With more than sufficient BINDING +1 votes, many non-binding +1s and no vetoes, I call the vote as PASSING. Pushing to mirrors and will announce tomorrow or so. Thx to all developers and testers! On Aug 17, 2012, at 1:34 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote: The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.3 can be found at the usual place: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.3 GA. NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part of the official release. [ ] +1: Good to go [ ] +0: meh [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why. Vote will last the normal 72 hrs.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.3 as GA
On 8/18/2012 8:39 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: On Aug 17, 2012, at 11:01 PM, Jess Holle je...@ptc.com wrote:\ Downstream customers in my case means customers that will deploy Apache and our products on their own servers. In a great many cases these servers run Windows. Ahh. That explains it. The Windows MPM is designed to be the most optimal implementation for Windows servers, dedicated and specific to Windows. What is it about the Windows MPM which is inadequate to your or your client's needs? We have direct access to Microsoft engineers, so I think they would also be curious as well. MS is quite interested in ensuring Apache httpd runs extremely well on Windows. The Windows MPM does indeed work rather well. That said, if one has a lot of long running connections that are mostly idle won't one run into exactly the same issues that mod_worker has vs. mod_event? What's the strategy for dealing with large numbers of long-poll requests, long HTTP keepalive settings, etc, with the Windows MPM? Similarly what's the strategy for this on UNIX when /all /the requests in question are HTTPS? Again, we've not hit the limit there with mod_worker, but a major interest in 2.4.x was raising the ceiling in this direction. -- Jess Holle
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.3 as GA
+1 on: fed16, OSX 10.8.0, FreeBSD 8.3 On Aug 17, 2012, at 1:34 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote: The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.3 can be found at the usual place: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.3 GA. NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part of the official release. [ ] +1: Good to go [ ] +0: meh [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why. Vote will last the normal 72 hrs.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.3 as GA
+1 on debian 6 and Windows Thanx for the Win SSL Fix Am Sonntag, 19. August 2012 schrieb Jim Jagielski : +1 on: fed16, OSX 10.8.0, FreeBSD 8.3 On Aug 17, 2012, at 1:34 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote: The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.3 can be found at the usual place: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.3 GA. NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part of the official release. [ ] +1: Good to go [ ] +0: meh [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why. Vote will last the normal 72 hrs.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.3 as GA
On 17.08.2012 19:34, Jim Jagielski wrote: The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.3 can be found at the usual place: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.3 GA. NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part of the official release. [X] +1: Good to go [ ] +0: meh [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why. +1 Interesting detail: I noticed that when testing with LogLevel trace7 the error logs were much bigger when building against OpenSSL 1.0.0g than when using OpenSSL 1.0.1c plus patch. It seems in some situations with 1.0.0 there's about 64KB data being exchanged and dumped to the error log whereas using 1.0.1 it is less than 100 Bytes. I checked only one occurrence and there it seemed to be related to renegotiations. The protocol spoken was TLSv1 resp. TLSv1.2. I did not find any indication why this should happen in the OpenSSL change log. Test Details: - Sigs and hashes OK - contents of tarballs identical - contents of tag and tarballs identical except for expected deltas (we could cleanup some m4 files in apr-util/xml/expat/conftools at the end of buildconf, no regression) Built on - Solaris 8+10 Sparc as 32 Bit Binaries - SLES 10 (32/64 Bits) - SLES 11 (64 Bits) - RHEL 5 and 6 (64 Bits) - with default (shared) and static modules - with module sets none, few, most, all, reallyall and default (always mod_privileges disabled) - using --enable-load-all-modules - against included APR/APU from deps tarball and external APR/APU 1.4.6/1.4.1 - using external libraries - expat 2.1.0 - pcre 8.30 - openssl 1.0.1c (when using bundled APR and openssl 1.0.0g (when using external APR) - lua 5.2.1 - distcache 1.5.1 - libxml2 2.8.0 - Tool chain: - platform gcc except for Solaris (gcc 4.1.2 for Solaris 8 and 4.7.1 for Solaris 10) - CFLAGS: -O2 -g -Wall -fno-strict-aliasing (and -mpcu=v9 on Solaris) All builds succeeded except for - SLES 10 32 and 64 Bits many static builds stop with error or crash during linking httpd. IMHO because of too many commandline params. Not a regression. - only with reallyall, all or most modules - SLES 11 one build stopped in libtool with a Memory error when linking mod_proxy_html. It proceeded correctly when calling make install afterwards. So it seems to be an OS / shell / ressource problem. - only with shared all modules and bundled apr I then updated the installed ksh from 93r to 93s and all builds could be completed. All builds against bundled APR did not detect crypto support, so were build without mod_session_crypto. That's a known problem in apr-util configure and not a regression. My build script workaround was broken this time. Tested for - Solaris 8+10 (32), SLES 10 (32/64), SLES 11 (64), RHEL 5+6 (64) - MPMs prefork, worker, event (except for Solaris 8 - no event) - default (shared) and static modules - log levels info, debug and trace8 - module set reallyall (~117 modules) All Tests passed with the following exceptions: a Test 5 in t/modules/dav.t: 8 out of 240 runs had the created time after the modified time. This seems to be a platform issue, all tests done on NFS, many tested on virtualized guests. Not a regression. b Test 8 in t/ssl/pr12355.t: Of the 240 runs there were two that failed this test, (on RHEL 5). 6 bytes were posted, but only 40934 bytes received Not reproducible, very rare. PR 12355 is: POST incompatible w/ renegotiate https: connection Not a regression. c Test 162 in t/ssl/proxy.t: Of the 240 runs there was one that failed this test, (on RHEL 5). 6 bytes were posted, but only 40934 bytes received Not reproducible, very rare. PR 12355 is: POST incompatible w/ renegotiate https: connection d On Solaris 8 one test run aborted, because at some point the web server could no longer acquire locks. So the children all died and finally the parent process exited. The testing file system was on NFS and multiple servers were tested in parallel, so this is possible. When rerunning the tests they suceeded. Regards, Rainer
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.3 as GA
On Aug 17, 2012, at 11:01 PM, Jess Holle je...@ptc.com wrote: Downstream customers in my case means customers that will deploy Apache and our products on their own servers. In a great many cases these servers run Windows. Ahh. That explains it. The Windows MPM is designed to be the most optimal implementation for Windows servers, dedicated and specific to Windows. What is it about the Windows MPM which is inadequate to your or your client's needs? We have direct access to Microsoft engineers, so I think they would also be curious as well. MS is quite interested in ensuring Apache httpd runs extremely well on Windows. The clients in most cases are Windows too, but that's a different matter entirely. On 8/17/2012 3:12 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: I am curious how the number of downstream customers being Windows effects anything on the server side... On Aug 17, 2012, at 2:16 PM, Jess Holle je...@ptc.com wrote: The fact that there is no event MPM equivalent for Windows is a huge gap for 2.4.x. Given the large percentage of our downstream customers using Windows there's not a huge motivation to move to 2.4.x. Moreover, it's my understanding that the event MPM falls back to behaving like the worker MPM in SSL cases. Is that true? If so, then that further decreases the motivation to move to 2.4.x. Overall, given that a large portion of our downstream usages are on Windows, say 50% for the sake of argument, and that a large percentage of our usages are HTTPS, again say 50% for the sake of argument, the benefits of the event MPM are really quite narrow in practice in our case. That said, I didn't know or had forgotten that SSL didn't work with the Windows MPM in 2.4.x. That would be a substantial regression from 2.2.x -- and resolving this would clear the way for 2.4.x being GA barring any other such regressions. -- Jess Holle On 8/17/2012 12:48 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: In the Announcement you'll see: NOTE to Windows users: The issues with AcceptFilter None replacing Win32DisableAcceptEx appears to have resolved starting with version 2.4.3 make Apache httpd 2.4.x suitable for Windows servers. NOTE: The event MPM is a *nix mpm and has never worked on Windows. On Aug 17, 2012, at 1:38 PM, Jess Holle je...@ptc.com wrote: Does the event MPM now: • Work on Windows? • Work with HTTPS? When both are true 2.4.x will become very interesting. Until then, not so much over 2.2.x. On 8/17/2012 12:34 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.3 can be found at the usual place: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.3 GA. NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part of the official release. [ ] +1: Good to go [ ] +0: meh [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why. Vote will last the normal 72 hrs. .
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.3 as GA
All goes fine on Windows, good to go. Steffen -Original Message- From: Jim Jagielski Sent: Friday, August 17, 2012 7:34 PM Newsgroups: gmane.comp.apache.devel To: dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.3 as GA The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.3 can be found at the usual place: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.3 GA. NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part of the official release. [ ] +1: Good to go [ ] +0: meh [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why. Vote will last the normal 72 hrs.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.3 as GA
I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.3 GA. +1 (AIX/PPC64 no regressions)
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.3 as GA
On 08/17/2012 07:34 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.3 can be found at the usual place: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.3 GA. NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part of the official release. [ ] +1: Good to go [ ] +0: meh [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why. Vote will last the normal 72 hrs. [X] +1: Good to go Tested on Debian 6.0, Ubuntu 12.04 and FreeBSD 9.0 (all AMD64) Configured, compiled and installed without problems with all modules built. All (working) tests in the test framework went fine. A few of them may need to have their design checked, as they were run when they shouldn't have been, but this isn't related to 2.4.3, so that's for another day. With regards, Daniel.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.3 as GA
signatures are good source files checked against svn license and notices in place compiles and runs on Mac OS X 10.7.4 +1 Roy
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.3 as GA
On Fri, 2012-08-17 at 13:34 -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote: [X] +1: Good to go [ ] +0: meh [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why. Vote will last the normal 72 hrs. Good to go on Slackware 13.1 13.37(and 14.0 rc2) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.3 as GA
On 8/17/2012 10:34 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: [X] +1: Good to go Looks good on Windows, the AcceptFilter none+ssl is working very well (thanks Jeff). Gregg
[VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.3 as GA
The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.3 can be found at the usual place: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.3 GA. NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part of the official release. [ ] +1: Good to go [ ] +0: meh [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why. Vote will last the normal 72 hrs.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.3 as GA
Does the event MPM now: 1. Work on Windows? 2. Work with HTTPS? When both are true 2.4.x will become very interesting. Until then, not so much over 2.2.x. On 8/17/2012 12:34 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.3 can be found at the usual place: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.3 GA. NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part of the official release. [ ] +1: Good to go [ ] +0: meh [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why. Vote will last the normal 72 hrs.
RE: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.3 as GA
I guess you mean WINMPM works with SSL, Event never worked on native Windows, neither on 2.2 nor on 2.4. But the SSL with 2.4 and the WinMPM is now fixed. Thanks to Jeff for this. Regards Rüdiger From: Jess Holle [mailto:je...@ptc.com] Sent: Friday, August 17, 2012 7:39 PM To: dev@httpd.apache.org Cc: Jim Jagielski Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.3 as GA Does the event MPM now: 1. Work on Windows? 2. Work with HTTPS? When both are true 2.4.x will become very interesting. Until then, not so much over 2.2.x. On 8/17/2012 12:34 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.3 can be found at the usual place: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.3 GA. NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part of the official release. [ ] +1: Good to go [ ] +0: meh [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why. Vote will last the normal 72 hrs.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.3 as GA
In the Announcement you'll see: NOTE to Windows users: The issues with AcceptFilter None replacing Win32DisableAcceptEx appears to have resolved starting with version 2.4.3 make Apache httpd 2.4.x suitable for Windows servers. NOTE: The event MPM is a *nix mpm and has never worked on Windows. On Aug 17, 2012, at 1:38 PM, Jess Holle je...@ptc.com wrote: Does the event MPM now: • Work on Windows? • Work with HTTPS? When both are true 2.4.x will become very interesting. Until then, not so much over 2.2.x. On 8/17/2012 12:34 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.3 can be found at the usual place: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.3 GA. NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part of the official release. [ ] +1: Good to go [ ] +0: meh [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why. Vote will last the normal 72 hrs.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.3 as GA
The fact that there is no event MPM equivalent for Windows is a huge gap for 2.4.x. Given the large percentage of our downstream customers using Windows there's not a huge motivation to move to 2.4.x. Moreover, it's my understanding that the event MPM falls back to behaving like the worker MPM in SSL cases. Is that true? If so, then that further decreases the motivation to move to 2.4.x. Overall, given that a large portion of our downstream usages are on Windows, say 50% for the sake of argument, and that a large percentage of our usages are HTTPS, again say 50% for the sake of argument, the benefits of the event MPM are really quite narrow in practice in our case. That said, I didn't know or had forgotten that SSL didn't work with the Windows MPM in 2.4.x. That would be a substantial regression from 2.2.x -- and resolving this would clear the way for 2.4.x being GA barring any other such regressions. -- Jess Holle On 8/17/2012 12:48 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: In the Announcement you'll see: NOTE to Windows users: The issues with AcceptFilter None replacing Win32DisableAcceptEx appears to have resolved starting with version 2.4.3 make Apache httpd 2.4.x suitable for Windows servers. NOTE: The event MPM is a *nix mpm and has never worked on Windows. On Aug 17, 2012, at 1:38 PM, Jess Holle je...@ptc.com wrote: Does the event MPM now: • Work on Windows? • Work with HTTPS? When both are true 2.4.x will become very interesting. Until then, not so much over 2.2.x. On 8/17/2012 12:34 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.3 can be found at the usual place: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.3 GA. NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part of the official release. [ ] +1: Good to go [ ] +0: meh [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why. Vote will last the normal 72 hrs.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.3 as GA
I am curious how the number of downstream customers being Windows effects anything on the server side... On Aug 17, 2012, at 2:16 PM, Jess Holle je...@ptc.com wrote: The fact that there is no event MPM equivalent for Windows is a huge gap for 2.4.x. Given the large percentage of our downstream customers using Windows there's not a huge motivation to move to 2.4.x. Moreover, it's my understanding that the event MPM falls back to behaving like the worker MPM in SSL cases. Is that true? If so, then that further decreases the motivation to move to 2.4.x. Overall, given that a large portion of our downstream usages are on Windows, say 50% for the sake of argument, and that a large percentage of our usages are HTTPS, again say 50% for the sake of argument, the benefits of the event MPM are really quite narrow in practice in our case. That said, I didn't know or had forgotten that SSL didn't work with the Windows MPM in 2.4.x. That would be a substantial regression from 2.2.x -- and resolving this would clear the way for 2.4.x being GA barring any other such regressions. -- Jess Holle On 8/17/2012 12:48 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: In the Announcement you'll see: NOTE to Windows users: The issues with AcceptFilter None replacing Win32DisableAcceptEx appears to have resolved starting with version 2.4.3 make Apache httpd 2.4.x suitable for Windows servers. NOTE: The event MPM is a *nix mpm and has never worked on Windows. On Aug 17, 2012, at 1:38 PM, Jess Holle je...@ptc.com wrote: Does the event MPM now: • Work on Windows? • Work with HTTPS? When both are true 2.4.x will become very interesting. Until then, not so much over 2.2.x. On 8/17/2012 12:34 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.3 can be found at the usual place: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.3 GA. NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part of the official release. [ ] +1: Good to go [ ] +0: meh [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why. Vote will last the normal 72 hrs.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.3 as GA
Downstream customers in my case means customers that will deploy Apache and our products on their own servers. In a great many cases these servers run Windows. The clients in most cases are Windows too, but that's a different matter entirely. On 8/17/2012 3:12 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: I am curious how the number of downstream customers being Windows effects anything on the server side... On Aug 17, 2012, at 2:16 PM, Jess Holle je...@ptc.com wrote: The fact that there is no event MPM equivalent for Windows is a huge gap for 2.4.x. Given the large percentage of our downstream customers using Windows there's not a huge motivation to move to 2.4.x. Moreover, it's my understanding that the event MPM falls back to behaving like the worker MPM in SSL cases. Is that true? If so, then that further decreases the motivation to move to 2.4.x. Overall, given that a large portion of our downstream usages are on Windows, say 50% for the sake of argument, and that a large percentage of our usages are HTTPS, again say 50% for the sake of argument, the benefits of the event MPM are really quite narrow in practice in our case. That said, I didn't know or had forgotten that SSL didn't work with the Windows MPM in 2.4.x. That would be a substantial regression from 2.2.x -- and resolving this would clear the way for 2.4.x being GA barring any other such regressions. -- Jess Holle On 8/17/2012 12:48 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: In the Announcement you'll see: NOTE to Windows users: The issues with AcceptFilter None replacing Win32DisableAcceptEx appears to have resolved starting with version 2.4.3 make Apache httpd 2.4.x suitable for Windows servers. NOTE: The event MPM is a *nix mpm and has never worked on Windows. On Aug 17, 2012, at 1:38 PM, Jess Holle je...@ptc.com wrote: Does the event MPM now: • Work on Windows? • Work with HTTPS? When both are true 2.4.x will become very interesting. Until then, not so much over 2.2.x. On 8/17/2012 12:34 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.3 can be found at the usual place: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.3 GA. NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part of the official release. [ ] +1: Good to go [ ] +0: meh [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why. Vote will last the normal 72 hrs. .
