Re: Final bump and roll of 2.0.36
+1 2.0.36 is better, plain and simple :) Cliff Woolley wrote: > > On Thu, 2 May 2002, Greg Ames wrote: > > > ...and no emails reporting strange behavior on the site. +1 for beta. > > +1 for beta from me as well. > > > What about GA? > > IMO: > > pros: > * we do people more of a disservice by continue to have them use 2.0.35 >and find already fixed bugs than by throwing another release at them >three weeks later > * what you said > > cons: > * worker shutdown is still wonky, at least on linux. part of me would >have rather seen it segfault. but just stick a warning in the release >notes to be wary of the potential rough edges there, and I'm okay with >it > > --Cliff > > -- >Cliff Woolley >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Charlottesville, VA > > -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ "A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both and deserve neither" - T.Jefferson
RE: Final bump and roll of 2.0.36
> From: Cliff Woolley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 02 May 2002 18:09 > On Thu, 2 May 2002, Greg Ames wrote: > >> ...and no emails reporting strange behavior on the site. +1 for beta. > > +1 for beta from me as well. Likewise. >> What about GA? > > IMO: > > pros: > * we do people more of a disservice by continue to have them use 2.0.35 >and find already fixed bugs than by throwing another release at them >three weeks later > * what you said > > cons: > * worker shutdown is still wonky, at least on linux. part of me would >have rather seen it segfault. but just stick a warning in the release >notes to be wary of the potential rough edges there, and I'm okay with >it +1. Lets give it the rest of the week and the weekend. Start moving for announce of GA on monday. Sander
Re: Final bump and roll of 2.0.36
On Thu, 2 May 2002, Greg Ames wrote: > ...and no emails reporting strange behavior on the site. +1 for beta. +1 for beta from me as well. > What about GA? IMO: pros: * we do people more of a disservice by continue to have them use 2.0.35 and find already fixed bugs than by throwing another release at them three weeks later * what you said cons: * worker shutdown is still wonky, at least on linux. part of me would have rather seen it segfault. but just stick a warning in the release notes to be wary of the potential rough edges there, and I'm okay with it --Cliff -- Cliff Woolley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Charlottesville, VA
Re: Final bump and roll of 2.0.36
I will be +1 for GA of 2.0.36 if it runs for 3 days w/o problems on daedalus. I'm not concerned with release announcements. 2.0.35 has some bugs which prevent it from being used in production. 2.0.36 eliminates these bugs. This really should have been our first GA release, not 2.0.35 :-) Bill > Greg Ames wrote: > > > > Sander Striker wrote: > > > > Tarballs are available at: > > > httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ > > > > > Please test and vote accordingly ;) > > > > It's running on daedalus since Wednesday, 01-May-2002 18:18:16 PDT with no > > apparent problems. I'll check it tomorrow, then vote. > > [gregames@daedalus gregames]$ ls /tmp/httpd.core > ls: /tmp/httpd.core: No such file or directory > [gregames@daedalus gregames]$ ls /usr/local/apache/corefiles/ > [gregames@daedalus gregames]$ > > ...and no emails reporting strange behavior on the site. +1 for beta. > > What about GA? > > pros: > > * The code seems more stable than 2.0.35. No big surprise; .36 wasn't rushed. > * worker's performance has improved noticably > * bunches of PRs have been fixed > > cons: > > * The exact release tarball hasn't run problem free for 3 days on daedalus yet > * It hasn't been very long since 2.0.35 was released. I worry a little bit > about overloading people with release announcements, plus it's a bunch of work > for us. > > IMO, the pros outweigh the cons, especially if we wait a few days. > > Greg >
Re: Final bump and roll of 2.0.36
Greg Ames wrote: > > Sander Striker wrote: > > Tarballs are available at: > > httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ > > > Please test and vote accordingly ;) > > It's running on daedalus since Wednesday, 01-May-2002 18:18:16 PDT with no > apparent problems. I'll check it tomorrow, then vote. [gregames@daedalus gregames]$ ls /tmp/httpd.core ls: /tmp/httpd.core: No such file or directory [gregames@daedalus gregames]$ ls /usr/local/apache/corefiles/ [gregames@daedalus gregames]$ ...and no emails reporting strange behavior on the site. +1 for beta. What about GA? pros: * The code seems more stable than 2.0.35. No big surprise; .36 wasn't rushed. * worker's performance has improved noticably * bunches of PRs have been fixed cons: * The exact release tarball hasn't run problem free for 3 days on daedalus yet * It hasn't been very long since 2.0.35 was released. I worry a little bit about overloading people with release announcements, plus it's a bunch of work for us. IMO, the pros outweigh the cons, especially if we wait a few days. Greg
Re: Final bump and roll of 2.0.36
"William A. Rowe, Jr." wrote: > > Ok... now I see your second post - tack on this discrepancy and retitle > the bug "Some versions of awk disagree with Win32 builds". Cygwin Awk Incompatible With Apache Build http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8726 -- Jerry Baker
Re: Final bump and roll of 2.0.36
At 06:15 PM 5/1/2002, Jerry Baker wrote: >I assume that pulling the APACHE_2_0_36 tag gets me the same things >as the aforementioned tarballs? If so, built and ran on Windows XP ok. > >PS - There is some trouble with a couple of the awk actions on >Windows XP at least. The following lines from makefile.win >result in a crash: > >awk -f <> "$(INSTDIR)\LICENSE.txt" >awk -f <"$(INSTDIR)\conf\httpd.default.conf" "$(INSTDIR)" >awk -f <"$(INSTDIR)\bin\dbmmanage.pl" > >Each one of these lines causes the following error: > >"The NTVDM CPU has encountered an illegal instruction. CS:0596 IP:001d >OP: ff ff ff ff ff Chose 'Close' to terminate the application." Sure sounds like a bug in your awk implementation. Which one/version number? We already have a report 8008 (djgpp 3.06)... you might want to note this discrepancy as well. If there is a syntax error in those scripts, I'm not seeing it. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8008 >Don't worry too much. This has been going on for quite some time. I won't... but keep us in the loop when things go nutty :-) Ok... now I see your second post - tack on this discrepancy and retitle the bug "Some versions of awk disagree with Win32 builds".
Re: Final bump and roll of 2.0.36
Sander Striker wrote: > > Hi, > > I've done the final bump. > > Tarballs are available at: > httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ > Please test and vote accordingly ;) It's running on daedalus since Wednesday, 01-May-2002 18:18:16 PDT with no apparent problems. I'll check it tomorrow, then vote. Greg
Re: Final bump and roll of 2.0.36
Sander Striker wrote: >Hi, > >I've done the final bump. Files marked with a [T] have made it to the >roll. Files marked with [-] haven't. I have included the logs of the >changes for your convenience. Lines marked RM: are lines with my commentary. > >Tarballs are available at: > httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ > >I haven't had the time to create zipfiles yet, sorry. > >Please test and vote accordingly ;) > Tested on Solaris (worker MPM) +1 --Brian
Re: Final bump and roll of 2.0.36
Jerry Baker wrote: > > Don't worry too much. This has been going on for quite some time. > Nevermind. Sorry. It was a problem with the Cygwin awk.exe. It isn't really an executable, but a symlink to gawk.exe. Problem is that Windows doesn't have symlinks. Renaming gawk.exe to awk.exe fixed it. :::stupid redhat::: -- Jerry Baker
Re: Final bump and roll of 2.0.36
Sander Striker wrote: > > Hi, > > I've done the final bump. Files marked with a [T] have made it to the > roll. Files marked with [-] haven't. I have included the logs of the > changes for your convenience. Lines marked RM: are lines with my commentary. > > Tarballs are available at: > httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ > > I haven't had the time to create zipfiles yet, sorry. > > Please test and vote accordingly ;) > > Sander I assume that pulling the APACHE_2_0_36 tag gets me the same things as the aforementioned tarballs? If so, built and ran on Windows XP ok. PS - There is some trouble with a couple of the awk actions on Windows XP at least. The following lines from makefile.win result in a crash: awk -f <> "$(INSTDIR)\LICENSE.txt" awk -f <"$(INSTDIR)\bin\dbmmanage.pl" Each one of these lines causes the following error: "The NTVDM CPU has encountered an illegal instruction. CS:0596 IP:001d OP: ff ff ff ff ff Chose 'Close' to terminate the application." Don't worry too much. This has been going on for quite some time. -- Jerry Baker
Re: Final bump and roll of 2.0.36
Ben? Is Ben in the house? david > On Wed, May 01, 2002 at 11:40:13PM +0200, Sander Striker wrote: > > Tarballs are available at: > > httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ > > +1 for beta. > > Passes httpd-test except for OpenSSL tests which seem to be confused > by recent changes in OpenSSL in the Email oid to now be emailAddress. > > Current OpenSSL snapshots have in crypto/objects/objects.txt: > pkcs9 1 : : emailAddress > > OpenSSL 0.9.6b has in crypto/objects/objects.txt: > pkcs9 1 : Email : emailAddress > > I'll assume that this is why none of the client cert tests are > working. *sigh* This doesn't look like anything we can > do, but I'm not 100% sure. -- justin >
Re: Final bump and roll of 2.0.36
On Wed, May 01, 2002 at 11:40:13PM +0200, Sander Striker wrote: > Tarballs are available at: > httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ +1 for beta. Passes httpd-test except for OpenSSL tests which seem to be confused by recent changes in OpenSSL in the Email oid to now be emailAddress. Current OpenSSL snapshots have in crypto/objects/objects.txt: pkcs9 1 : : emailAddress OpenSSL 0.9.6b has in crypto/objects/objects.txt: pkcs9 1 : Email : emailAddress I'll assume that this is why none of the client cert tests are working. *sigh* This doesn't look like anything we can do, but I'm not 100% sure. -- justin
Final bump and roll of 2.0.36
Hi, I've done the final bump. Files marked with a [T] have made it to the roll. Files marked with [-] haven't. I have included the logs of the changes for your convenience. Lines marked RM: are lines with my commentary. Tarballs are available at: httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ I haven't had the time to create zipfiles yet, sorry. Please test and vote accordingly ;) Sander = httpd-2.0 = [T] Apache.dsw (1.79) wrowe Log: Always build this experimental module (which has no library dependencies). Build failure reported by Jerry Baker to dev@httpd - [T] BuildBin.dsp (1.4) wrowe Log: Should correctly build mod_ext_filter, mod_deflate dependant upon zlib, and change the license-add code for openssl+zlib based on the newest changes to a global LICENSE for all bundled components. - [T] CHANGES (1.751) RM: Updated prior to retagging. - [T] Makefile.win (1.98) wrowe Log: Should correctly build mod_ext_filter, mod_deflate dependant upon zlib, and change the license-add code for openssl+zlib based on the newest changes to a global LICENSE for all bundled components. - [T] NWGNUmakefile (1.5) [T] build/NWGNUenvironment.inc (1.2) bnicholes Log: Fixing up the distribution and install section of the NetWare make files Submitted by: Guenter Knauf - [T] docs/manual/server-wide.html.en (1.8) [T] docs/manual/server-wide.html.ja.jis (1.5) [T] docs/manual/mod/mod_cache.xml (1.2) [T] docs/manual/platform/win_compiling.html (1.11) RM: documentation changes always have to go in IMO. - [T] include/ap_mmn.h (1.43) wrowe Log: Demote to a minor bump for .36 - those affected by API changes should be a very small subset of modules. Here are the afflicted types & fns; apr_explode_time -> apr_time_exp_tz apr_explode_localtime -> apr_time_exp_lt apr_get_groupname -> apr_group_name_get deprecated apr_lock_t, apr_os_lock_t and fns, but the warnings have been there a while so no sympathy. added dav_hooks_search_t and DASL Search functions. added apr_cmdtype_e *type arg to mod_cgi opt fn ap_cgi_build_command. added proxy_fixups hook and ap_proxy_ssl_disable, and optional fn ssl_engine_disable. RM: Personally don't have strong feelings about this. At the lack of feedback I assume everyone lazily agrees. Thus the bump. - [T] modules/NWGNUmakefile (1.2) [T] modules/experimental/NWGNUdeflate (1.1) [T] modules/experimental/NWGNUdsk_cach (1.1) [T] modules/experimental/NWGNUexample (1.1) [T] modules/experimental/NWGNUmakefile (1.2) [T] modules/experimental/NWGNUmem_cach (1.1) [T] modules/experimental/NWGNUmod_cach (1.1) bnicholes Log: NetWare make files for building experimental modules mod_deflate, mod_example and support utilities ab, htdbm and logresolve Submitted by: Guenter Knauf [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] bnicholes Log: NetWare make files for building experimental module mod_cache and its associated support modules. Submitted by: Jean-Jacques Clar [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] - [T] modules/experimental/mod_mem_cache.c (1.50) stoddard Log: Name space protect mod_mem_cache config directives stoddard Log: Forget to update the error messages stoddard Log: remove_entity should only work on complete cache_objects stoddard Log: Enable mod_mem_cache to be configured to cache open file handle using new directive option: CacheEnable fd / will enable caching fds. If for some reason the fd cannot be cached, the directive will effectively morph into CacheEnable mem / - [T] modules/proxy/NWGNUproxy bnicholes Log: Added some missing export to the proxy module Submitted by: Guenter Knauf - [T] modules/ssl/README (1.33) [T] modules/ssl/mod_ssl.c (1.64) [T] modules/ssl/ssl_engine_log.c (1.18) [T] modules/ssl/ssl_scache_shmcb.c (1.12) jwoolley Log: note a desirable goal jwoolley Log: Revert optimization from circa 2.0.34 that caused very long vhost id's to be unusable with mod_ssl. PR: 8572 jwoolley Log: - Sync with modssl 2.8.8-1.3.24 - Also a minor change to add more useful error logging for shmcb startup failures jwoolley Log: SHMCB should not have be
