Re: svn commit: r1162881 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c
On Mon, 29 Aug 2011, j...@apache.org wrote:
Author: jim
Date: Mon Aug 29 15:53:52 2011
New Revision: 1162881
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1162881view=rev
Log:
Allow for actual counting...
Modified:
httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c
Modified: httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c?rev=1162881r1=1162880r2=1162881view=diff
==
--- httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c (original)
+++ httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c Mon Aug 29
15:53:52 2011
@@ -137,6 +137,7 @@ static apr_status_t copy_brigade_range(a
if (off_first != start64) {
rv = apr_bucket_split(copy, (apr_size_t)(start64 - off_first));
if (rv == APR_ENOTIMPL) {
+int i;
rv = apr_bucket_read(copy, s, len, APR_BLOCK_READ);
if (rv != APR_SUCCESS) {
apr_brigade_cleanup(bbout);
@@ -147,9 +148,10 @@ static apr_status_t copy_brigade_range(a
* of shorter length. So read and delete until we reached
* the correct bucket for splitting.
*/
+i = 0;
while (start64 - off_first (apr_uint64_t)copy-length) {
apr_bucket *tmp;
-int i = 0;
+/* don't allow inf. spin */
if (i++ = 9)
return APR_EINVAL;
IMNSHO such changes need to be voted upon before commiting to
branches/2.2.x. When can this case happen? And why do it for the start
bucket but not for the end bucket?
RE: svn commit: r1162881 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c
-Original Message-
From: Stefan Fritsch [mailto:s...@sfritsch.de]
Sent: Montag, 29. August 2011 18:00
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r1162881 -
/httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c
On Mon, 29 Aug 2011, j...@apache.org wrote:
Author: jim
Date: Mon Aug 29 15:53:52 2011
New Revision: 1162881
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1162881view=rev
Log:
Allow for actual counting...
Modified:
httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c
Modified: httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/module
s/http/byterange_filter.c?rev=1162881r1=1162880r2=1162881view=diff
==
---
httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c (original)
+++
httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c
Mon Aug 29 15:53:52 2011
@@ -137,6 +137,7 @@ static apr_status_t copy_brigade_range(a
if (off_first != start64) {
rv = apr_bucket_split(copy,
(apr_size_t)(start64 - off_first));
if (rv == APR_ENOTIMPL) {
+int i;
rv = apr_bucket_read(copy, s, len,
APR_BLOCK_READ);
if (rv != APR_SUCCESS) {
apr_brigade_cleanup(bbout);
@@ -147,9 +148,10 @@ static apr_status_t copy_brigade_range(a
* of shorter length. So read and
delete until we reached
* the correct bucket for splitting.
*/
+i = 0;
while (start64 - off_first
(apr_uint64_t)copy-length) {
apr_bucket *tmp;
-int i = 0;
+/* don't allow inf. spin */
if (i++ = 9)
return APR_EINVAL;
IMNSHO such changes need to be voted upon before commiting to
branches/2.2.x. When can this case happen? And why do it for
the start
bucket but not for the end bucket?
Agreed. Please let us bring this in shape in trunk and backport a voted
solution later on
to 2.2.x.
Regards
Rüdiger
Re: svn commit: r1162881 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c
The code was removed ala trunk… it was dead code anyway and never did anything since i was constantly being (re)set to 0 anyway.
Re: svn commit: r1162881 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c
Do we need to vote on this: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1162885view=rev
RE: svn commit: r1162881 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c
I am fine with this on 2.2.x. +1. Regards Rüdiger -Original Message- From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@apache.org] Sent: Montag, 29. August 2011 18:22 To: dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r1162881 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c Do we need to vote on this: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1162885view=rev
Re: svn commit: r1162881 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c
On Monday 29 August 2011, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote: I am fine with this on 2.2.x. +1. Me too, +1. Regards Rüdiger -Original Message- From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@apache.org] Sent: Montag, 29. August 2011 18:22 To: dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r1162881 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c Do we need to vote on this: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1162885view=rev
Re: svn commit: r1162881 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group ruediger.pl...@vodafone.com wrote: I am fine with this on 2.2.x. +1. +1 here too
