Re: Documentation for Apache::exit()?
On Wednesday, 2002-09-25 at 10:41:19 -0400, valerian wrote: BTW, anyone know if Perl 6 will free unused memory? From what I understand, right now it just allocates as needed, but never gives any back to the OS when it's done... (ie, when some function ends) Even if Parrot (the perl 6 engine) free()'s unused memory, all malloc implementations I know will not return memory to the OS. If the implementation uses brk() or sbrk(), it can only grow or shrink the data segment, not deallocate arbitrary parts of it. Only if it mmap()'s from /dev/null it can do that. Add to this mess that free()'d memory tends to be non-contiguous, you have a nice SMOP. Lots of overhead for little gain. Lupe Christoph -- | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.lupe-christoph.de/ | | Big Misunderstandings #6398: The Titanic was not supposed to be| | unsinkable. The designer had a speech impediment. He said: I have | | thith great unthinkable conthept ... |
When does mod_ssl register input/output filter
While constructing process connection handler employing bucket-brigade feature of Apache 2, I encountered some problem. I am trying to handle protocols other than HTTP and most of them starts communication from sending server hello message. When SSL handshake takes too long, communication fails. Process flow goes like this Apache: TCP/IP connection mod_ssl: SSL handshake starts Handler: Process handler starts Handler: Tries to send data to client - send bucket-brigade to output_filters mod_ssl: SSL handshake done - register input/output_filter If the handler can detect when the output_filter is ready, it will be fine, however there seems to be no functions to detect such events. Do you know how to detect SSL handshake is complete, or is there other solution?
Reverse Proxy Setup
Hi, I have two experimental servers frontend and mod_perl. mod_perl is apache with mod_perl frontend is apache lightweight My config only passes *.pl thru to mod_perl When a user uploads a file they use a mod_perl script on mod_perl and the file is saved on mod_perl. But I want the file to be on frontend as it makes sense for when they download the file ... they only need a lightweight apache server to do that. So far I can think of doing 1. Putting a cgi script on frontend to handle file uploads and save the file on frontend. 2. Use network file share between mod_perl and frontend. Any other ideas? Scott
[mp2] Build problems on HPUX11.00 with HP ANSI C (aCC)
Hi All I've spent the last two days reading various docs and posts trying to resolve this problem. If this is a known issue or has been answered previously please accept my apologies and by all means point me in the direction of the correct documentation / newsgroup / mailing list archive. I am attempting to build mod_perl from the 1.99_05 source with Apache 2.0.40 and perl 5.8.0 both of which were built from source with the HP ANSI C compiler : B3901BA B.11.01.07 HP C/ANSI C Developer's Bundle for HP-UX 11.00 (S800) (I'm using the HP compiler because a) we have it available and it's recommended in the Perl hpux.readme and b) I had problems trying to build perl with gcc 3.x as supplied via the HPUX Porting and Archive site) Perl and Apache built without problems and Apache runs fine without mod-perl. (I have served some test html and cgi queries fine) During the mod-perl build I get the same warning from each component build : cpp: /usr/local/lib/perl5/5.8.0/PA-RISC1.1-thread-multi/CORE/config.h, line 41: warning 2002: Redefinition of param names for macro __attribute__. I tried to run a 'make test' anyhow since I've had cases in the past where warnings similar to the above haven't caused any issues. When the test routine tries to start it's httpd to test against it eventually falls over with the following message : *** setting ulimit to allow core files ulimit -c unlimited; t/TEST /usr/local/apache2/bin/httpd -d /oracle/db/GSE/04/techweb/mod_perl-1.99_05/t -f /oracle/db/GSE/04/techweb/mod_perl-1.99_05/t/conf/httpd.conf -DAPACHE2 -DPERL_USEITHREADS using Apache/2.0.40 (prefork MPM) waiting for server to start: . waiting for server to start: giving up after 61 secs !!! server failed to start! (t/logs/error_log wasn't created, start the server in the debug mode) *** Error exit code 1 In actual fact a server is started but the httpd process just spins consuming 90% of one CPU and the only way to stop it is to issue a kill -9 (_SIGKILL) to the process. Has any one out there successful build on HPUX 11 ? I have attached the output of t/REPORT. Many thanks in advance. Paul -8-- Start Bug Report 8-- 1. Problem Description: 2. Used Components and their Configuration: *** using lib/Apache/BuildConfig.pm *** Makefile.PL options: MP_APXS= /usr/local/apache2/bin/apxs MP_GENERATE_XS = 1 MP_LIBNAME = mod_perl MP_USE_DSO = 1 MP_USE_STATIC = 1 *** /usr/local/apache2/bin/httpd -V Server version: Apache/2.0.40 Server built: Sep 26 2002 08:50:18 Server's Module Magic Number: 20020628:0 Architecture: 32-bit Server compiled with -D APACHE_MPM_DIR=server/mpm/prefork -D APR_HAS_SENDFILE -D APR_HAS_MMAP -D APR_USE_SYSVSEM_SERIALIZE -D APR_USE_PTHREAD_SERIALIZE -D APR_HAS_OTHER_CHILD -D AP_HAVE_RELIABLE_PIPED_LOGS -D HTTPD_ROOT=/usr/local/apache2 -D SUEXEC_BIN=/usr/local/apache2/bin/suexec -D DEFAULT_PIDLOG=logs/httpd.pid -D DEFAULT_SCOREBOARD=logs/apache_runtime_status -D DEFAULT_LOCKFILE=logs/accept.lock -D DEFAULT_ERRORLOG=logs/error_log -D AP_TYPES_CONFIG_FILE=conf/mime.types -D SERVER_CONFIG_FILE=conf/httpd.conf *** /usr/local/bin/perl -V Summary of my perl5 (revision 5.0 version 8 subversion 0) configuration: Platform: osname=hpux, osvers=11.00, archname=PA-RISC1.1-thread-multi uname='hp-ux tutdarlb b.11.00 a 9000831 282814 two-user license ' config_args='-de' hint=previous, useposix=true, d_sigaction=define usethreads=define use5005threads=undef useithreads=define usemultiplicity=define useperlio=define d_sfio=undef uselargefiles=define usesocks=undef use64bitint=undef use64bitall=undef uselongdouble=undef usemymalloc=n, bincompat5005=undef Compiler: cc='cc', ccflags ='-D_POSIX_C_SOURCE=199506L -D_REENTRANT -Ae -D_HPUX_SOURCE -Wl,+vnocompatwarnings -I/usr/local/include -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 +Z', optimize='+O2 +Onolimit', cppflags='-Aa -D__STDC_EXT__ -D_HPUX_SOURCE -D_POSIX_C_SOURCE=199506L -D_REENTRANT -Ae -D_HPUX_SOURCE -Wl,+vnocompatwarnings -I/usr/local/include -D_POSIX_C_SOURCE=199506L -D_REENTRANT -Ae -D_HPUX_SOURCE -Wl,+vnocompatwarnings -I/usr/local/include -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 +Z -D_POSIX_C_SOURCE=199506L -D_REENTRANT -Ae -D_HPUX_SOURCE -Wl,+vnocompatwarnings -I/usr/local/include -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 +Z' ccversion='A.11.01.00', gccversion='', gccosandvers='' intsize=4, longsize=4, ptrsize=4, doublesize=8, byteorder=4321 d_longlong=define, longlongsize=8, d_longdbl=define, longdblsize=16 ivtype='long', ivsize=4, nvtype='double', nvsize=8, Off_t='off_t', lseeksize=8 alignbytes=8, prototype=define Linker and Libraries: ld='/usr/bin/ld', ldflags =' -L/usr/local/lib' libpth=/usr/local/lib /lib /usr/lib /usr/ccs/lib libs=-lnsl -lnm -lndbm -lmalloc -ldld -lm -lpthread -lc
[OT] - Mailing List Servers/mods .. etc
Sorry.. This is completely off topic.. but I have a question you guys might help me with.. I'm writing then next part of a big modperl project I'm doing.. This bit could be loosely called a mailing-list-server.. The listserver is going to handle out-going (only'ish) opt-in mailing lists. The opting-in bit is all bound into the rest of the project, as is the construction of the outgoing email, and the list management... I'm wondering if there is any point in looking for a piece of third party software/module etc, that will handle the sending of the mail or should I work directly with sendmail? (Is sendmail the best mailserver for this kind of thing?) I'd be happy to write something along the line of formail.pl on my own, so I kinda know what I'm doing, but I'm gonna have to take things like Return to sender errors and such into account.. My question I guess is: - Is it ok to send 100's or 1000's of mails to sendmail in one go, or is there a better way of doing bulk mail? - Are there any mods to help with dealing with returned mail etc..? - Is there a good list of people doing this sort of thing? (Or do you mind the thread being a little off-topic!) I don't think I'm trying to reinvent the wheel.. Just that I think there is so much of my own coding involved, I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to get away with anything less than writing it from scratch.. Would be greatful for any advice, Kindest, Jimbo Jim Morrison _ Technology Development Partner Isotope LLP 9, 2 Laura Place Bath, BA2 4BH UK +44 (0) 1225 446170 +44 (0) 7940 937822 www.mediaisotope.com
RE: [OT] - Mailing List Servers/mods .. etc
Look at MIME::Lite on CPAN -Original Message- From: Jim Morrison [Mailinglists] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 8:44 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [OT] - Mailing List Servers/mods .. etc Sorry.. This is completely off topic.. but I have a question you guys might help me with.. I'm writing then next part of a big modperl project I'm doing.. This bit could be loosely called a mailing-list-server.. The listserver is going to handle out-going (only'ish) opt-in mailing lists. The opting-in bit is all bound into the rest of the project, as is the construction of the outgoing email, and the list management... I'm wondering if there is any point in looking for a piece of third party software/module etc, that will handle the sending of the mail or should I work directly with sendmail? (Is sendmail the best mailserver for this kind of thing?) I'd be happy to write something along the line of formail.pl on my own, so I kinda know what I'm doing, but I'm gonna have to take things like Return to sender errors and such into account.. My question I guess is: - Is it ok to send 100's or 1000's of mails to sendmail in one go, or is there a better way of doing bulk mail? - Are there any mods to help with dealing with returned mail etc..? - Is there a good list of people doing this sort of thing? (Or do you mind the thread being a little off-topic!) I don't think I'm trying to reinvent the wheel.. Just that I think there is so much of my own coding involved, I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to get away with anything less than writing it from scratch.. Would be greatful for any advice, Kindest, Jimbo Jim Morrison _ Technology Development Partner Isotope LLP 9, 2 Laura Place Bath, BA2 4BH UK +44 (0) 1225 446170 +44 (0) 7940 937822 www.mediaisotope.com
Re: [OT] - Mailing List Servers/mods .. etc
I did just this. Unfortunatly, sendmail proved to be too slow, both in command line piping (i.e. open(PROG,| sendmail );), and via socket connection to port 25 to be a viable solution for the volume of mail we sent. Last I checked, the code I wrote interfaced with Lyris, which was performing ok. When I left the project, they were looking into alternative approaches to sending email. Note that this was all legitimate (double opt-in) bulk email. I have some code which is public. Go grab SMTP-* from http://bigrob.ath.cx/dist/. These are a little better than the currently existing Net:: modules. I do a bit more logging and error checking. At some point, those should be on CPAN if I can get the namespace approved. :) Good luck, Rob On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 02:44:12PM +0100, Jim Morrison [Mailinglists] wrote: Sorry.. This is completely off topic.. but I have a question you guys might help me with.. I'm writing then next part of a big modperl project I'm doing.. This bit could be loosely called a mailing-list-server.. The listserver is going to handle out-going (only'ish) opt-in mailing lists. The opting-in bit is all bound into the rest of the project, as is the construction of the outgoing email, and the list management... I'm wondering if there is any point in looking for a piece of third party software/module etc, that will handle the sending of the mail or should I work directly with sendmail? (Is sendmail the best mailserver for this kind of thing?) I'd be happy to write something along the line of formail.pl on my own, so I kinda know what I'm doing, but I'm gonna have to take things like Return to sender errors and such into account.. My question I guess is: - Is it ok to send 100's or 1000's of mails to sendmail in one go, or is there a better way of doing bulk mail? - Are there any mods to help with dealing with returned mail etc..? - Is there a good list of people doing this sort of thing? (Or do you mind the thread being a little off-topic!) I don't think I'm trying to reinvent the wheel.. Just that I think there is so much of my own coding involved, I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to get away with anything less than writing it from scratch.. Would be greatful for any advice, Kindest, Jimbo Jim Morrison _ Technology Development Partner Isotope LLP 9, 2 Laura Place Bath, BA2 4BH UK +44 (0) 1225 446170 +44 (0) 7940 937822 www.mediaisotope.com
Re: Reverse Proxy Setup
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Scott Alexander wrote: I have two experimental servers frontend and mod_perl. mod_perl is apache with mod_perl frontend is apache lightweight My config only passes *.pl thru to mod_perl When a user uploads a file they use a mod_perl script on mod_perl and the file is saved on mod_perl. If you use mod_proxy thne mod_perl would be busy for all upload time. Although there's patch for mod_proxy to buffer upload in temp file. mod_accel always buffers client's upload. But I want the file to be on frontend as it makes sense for when they download the file ... they only need a lightweight apache server to do that. So far I can think of doing 1. Putting a cgi script on frontend to handle file uploads and save the file on frontend. 2. Use network file share between mod_perl and frontend. You can send file from mod_perl and cache it on frontend. If you use mod_accel then it buffers whole reponse from backend in temp file and releases mod_perl as soon as possible. You even do not need to cache it. Igor Sysoev http://sysoev.ru
Re: [OT] - Mailing List Servers/mods .. etc
It's been a while since I last used it, but I used a perl app called bulkmail. Worked like a champ on a UNIX/sendmail system. Robert Landrum wrote: I did just this. Unfortunatly, sendmail proved to be too slow, both in command line piping (i.e. open(PROG,| sendmail );), and via socket connection to port 25 to be a viable solution for the volume of mail we sent. Last I checked, the code I wrote interfaced with Lyris, which was performing ok. When I left the project, they were looking into alternative approaches to sending email. Note that this was all legitimate (double opt-in) bulk email. I have some code which is public. Go grab SMTP-* from http://bigrob.ath.cx/dist/. These are a little better than the currently existing Net:: modules. I do a bit more logging and error checking. At some point, those should be on CPAN if I can get the namespace approved. :) Good luck, Rob On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 02:44:12PM +0100, Jim Morrison [Mailinglists] wrote: Sorry.. This is completely off topic.. but I have a question you guys might help me with.. I'm writing then next part of a big modperl project I'm doing.. This bit could be loosely called a mailing-list-server.. The listserver is going to handle out-going (only'ish) opt-in mailing lists. The opting-in bit is all bound into the rest of the project, as is the construction of the outgoing email, and the list management... I'm wondering if there is any point in looking for a piece of third party software/module etc, that will handle the sending of the mail or should I work directly with sendmail? (Is sendmail the best mailserver for this kind of thing?) I'd be happy to write something along the line of formail.pl on my own, so I kinda know what I'm doing, but I'm gonna have to take things like Return to sender errors and such into account.. My question I guess is: - Is it ok to send 100's or 1000's of mails to sendmail in one go, or is there a better way of doing bulk mail? - Are there any mods to help with dealing with returned mail etc..? - Is there a good list of people doing this sort of thing? (Or do you mind the thread being a little off-topic!) I don't think I'm trying to reinvent the wheel.. Just that I think there is so much of my own coding involved, I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to get away with anything less than writing it from scratch.. Would be greatful for any advice, Kindest, Jimbo Jim Morrison _ Technology Development Partner Isotope LLP 9, 2 Laura Place Bath, BA2 4BH UK +44 (0) 1225 446170 +44 (0) 7940 937822 www.mediaisotope.com -- Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape! http://shopnow.netscape.com/
Re: Reverse Proxy Setup
Make proxy and mod_perl have the same document root. Use mod_rewrite on the lightweight proxy to serve certain directories from itself rather then passing them back to modperl (have it server images while you are at it) Upload files to the directory specified above. Result : File is uploaded using mod_perl but accessed using the static apache. Bonus, your images are served out of it as well meaning you get a really great performance boost. John- On Thu, 26 Sep 2002 18:30:45 +0400 (MSD) Igor Sysoev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Scott Alexander wrote: I have two experimental servers frontend and mod_perl. mod_perl is apache with mod_perl frontend is apache lightweight My config only passes *.pl thru to mod_perl When a user uploads a file they use a mod_perl script on mod_perl and the file is saved on mod_perl. If you use mod_proxy thne mod_perl would be busy for all upload time. Although there's patch for mod_proxy to buffer upload in temp file. mod_accel always buffers client's upload. But I want the file to be on frontend as it makes sense for when they download the file ... they only need a lightweight apache server to do that. So far I can think of doing 1. Putting a cgi script on frontend to handle file uploads and save the file on frontend. 2. Use network file share between mod_perl and frontend. You can send file from mod_perl and cache it on frontend. If you use mod_accel then it buffers whole reponse from backend in temp file and releases mod_perl as soon as possible. You even do not need to cache it. Igor Sysoev http://sysoev.ru
Re: [OT] - Mailing List Servers/mods .. etc
Jim Morrison [Mailinglists] writes: I'm wondering if there is any point in looking for a piece of third party software/module etc, that will handle the sending of the mail or should I work directly with sendmail? (Is sendmail the best mailserver for this kind of thing?) sendmail has its problems, but I can send about 10K msgs/hour on a low-end server (500Mhz). It's good enough for most low-end mailing list problems. I'd be happy to write something along the line of formail.pl on my own, so I kinda know what I'm doing, but I'm gonna have to take things like Return to sender errors and such into account.. Tough problem in general, which companies like experian, doubleclick and returnpath.net spend lots of money on. You need to know how to parse this information without false positives. My question I guess is: - Is it ok to send 100's or 1000's of mails to sendmail in one go, or is there a better way of doing bulk mail? I don't think you should worry about it right now. sendmail can handle the load. You can always use an internal relay if you need to distribute the load. Hardware is cheap. - Are there any mods to help with dealing with returned mail etc..? bOP has a C program called b-sendmail-http.[1] It's a gateway from sendmail to http. We handle all mail through mod_perl. You can use b-sendmail-http with any HTTP implementation, because it simply wraps the e-mail, client IP, and envelope to into multipart/form-data.[2] - Is there a good list of people doing this sort of thing? (Or do you mind the thread being a little off-topic!) I like it, then my current project is in this space. :-) I don't think I'm trying to reinvent the wheel.. Just that I think there is so much of my own coding involved, I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to get away with anything less than writing it from scratch.. The code isn't complicated, but the detailed knowledge is. There are a number of mailinglist packages out there including ultimate bbs, which is used by quite a number of sites. We rolled our own, because email is integrated with other apps (e.g. search, file sharing, and group join). Rob [1] http://www.bivio.biz/f/bOP/bin/b-sendmail-http.c [2] http://petshop.bivio.biz/src?s=Bivio::Biz::Model::MailReceiveBaseForm
Re: [OT] - Mailing List Servers/mods .. etc
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 02:44:12PM +0100, Jim Morrison [Mailinglists] wrote: Sorry.. This is completely off topic.. but I have a question you guys might help me with.. I'm writing then next part of a big modperl project I'm doing.. This bit could be loosely called a mailing-list-server.. The listserver is going to handle out-going (only'ish) opt-in mailing lists. The opting-in bit is all bound into the rest of the project, as is the construction of the outgoing email, and the list management... I endorse qmail + ezmlm for mailing list management. There are many tales of qmail being faster than sendmail, with respect to enqueuing and remotely delivering mail. And, ezmlm (a qmail-aware mailing list manager) readily handles issues like bounce management, etc. I'm wondering if there is any point in looking for a piece of third party software/module etc, that will handle the sending of the mail or should I work directly with sendmail? (Is sendmail the best mailserver for this kind of thing?) Qmail does provide an interface called 'sendmail', so it would drop in, without a hitch. Qmail, hoever, does have a lower-level mechanism for injecting mail into the local queue, called 'qmail-inject'; even more efficient. I'd be happy to write something along the line of formail.pl on my own, so I kinda know what I'm doing, but I'm gonna have to take things like Return to sender errors and such into account.. Hit Google. People have written plenty of webbish front-ends to the qmail universe (as well as other MTAs). My question I guess is: - Is it ok to send 100's or 1000's of mails to sendmail in one go, or is there a better way of doing bulk mail? If the email messages are identical (ie., not customized for each recipient), then a bulk inject via qmail-inject is the way to go; you can easily inject _many_ thousands of messages in one go. Even better: just treat your list of subscibers as an ezmlm mailing list; all your code has to do is 'send this message to list'. You don't have to do any work at all; ezmlm will even manage bounces for you, and unsubscribe people. - Are there any mods to help with dealing with returned mail etc..? For this reason, among many others, I use qmail instead of sendmail for automated mail generation + handling, so that I can take advantage of the VERP feature. Essentially, it's a way of crafting the sender part of the envelope to redundtanly contain the recipient part, such that when your server receives a bounce, it 'knows' who it was sent to. Saves you the pain of parsing the myriad non-standard bounce message formats out there. See: http://cr.yp.to/proto/verp.txt - Is there a good list of people doing this sort of thing? (Or do you mind the thread being a little off-topic!) This whole issue isn't about a web server; it's about how to generate automated mail, and to manage returned messages programmtically. It sounds like the conversation should happen on a mailing list for your MTA of choice. (sendmail, qmail, postfix, etc.) So, start looking here: http://www.ezmlm.org/ This will explain tons of features of ezmlm. If it wins you over, go here for qmail itself: http://www.qmail.org/ I don't think I'm trying to reinvent the wheel.. Just that I think there is so much of my own coding involved, I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to get away with anything less than writing it from scratch.. Offload all of your mail-handling onto a MLM/MUA combo you trust. Don't reinvent _that_ wheel. Would be greatful for any advice, Good luck. Kindest, Jimbo -- Brian 'you Bastard' Reichert[EMAIL PROTECTED] 37 Crystal Ave. #303Daytime number: (603) 434-6842 Derry NH 03038-1713 USA Intel architecture: the left-hand path
Re: Documentation for Apache::exit()?
Hi Kyle, There are a few performance penalties when using Apache::Registry: * Scripts are compiled at first request instead of server start unless you use something like Apache::RegistryLoader. So, the first request per child will be a little bit slower and you don't get to share memory between httpd children. (Memory sharing can be a big problem.) * Every request runs through Apache::Registry::handler before your script gets called which has overhead including some setup code, an extra stat(), and a chdir(). (PerlRun and RegistryNG uses $r-finfo but Registry does an extra stat() -- not sure if there's a reason for that.) Thanks a lot. I hadn't thought of the memory problem. It seems that I'll have to bite the proverbial bullet and not use Apache::Registry. Francisco
Re: Documentation for Apache::exit()?
Hi Ged, Thanks for replying. I hope you had a good time in my old country :-) You probably saw the reports on the news about roads being washed away by the rain in Sevilla. I went on a motor-cycle. Camping. Mmm... Doesn't sound like the perfect vacation. I'm glad you made it back :-) If you're writing new code then I would recommend writing handlers and avoiding Apache::Registry altogether. Why do you recommend avoiding Apache::Registry? Apache::Registry is essentially just to get you going with mod_perl and your old CGI scripts. See for example mod_perl_traps.pod which deals with some of the 'gotchas' that you can run into. You can make better use of the Perl API using handlers. (Of course you might not need to.:) Is there a performance penalty for using it? Handlers can be faster, yes, but since you get such a big performance boost from mod_perl to begin with it's not usually serious. Read the the Eagle Book, the mod_perl Guide and the mod_perl CookBook. (That will take you most of the rest of the year...:) The details are on the mod_perl home page. Thanks for the pointers. I've read the Eagle Book already, and I check the Guide as needed, but I wasn't aware of the mod_perl CookBook. I've checked the table of contents on Amazon and ordered it. Francisco --- Francisco Corella [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: BUG:Apache::Cookie v1.0
* Michael McLagan [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-09-21 11:45]:
There is a bug in Apache::Cookie. It doesn't handle a cookie with
zero bytes in it!
This is because Apache::Cookie is implemented in C, and C uses NULL as
the end of string terminator.
No quite accurate. C has no concept of a string. There are a number of
library functions for string handling that use '\0' as the string
terminator.
If somebody rewrites Apache::Cookie to replace those functions, it will
be able to handle such cookies.
This is probably something that needs to be done in Perl, since I doubt
there's a way to check for embedded NULLs in a string in C...
/* We assume there will always a '\0' to be found. */
char *
find_nul(char *str)
{
while (*str) {
str++;
}
return str;
}
What interests me much more is *why* a cookie should be able to contain
*any* control character. If you want binary data in a cookie, you should
encode it somehow.
If the '\0' was a '\n', things would be much more interesting ...
Lupe Christoph
hmmm... that's not really to point. Apache::Cookie is supposed to be
modeled on and replace CGI::Cookie. If you examine the code in CGI::Cookie
you see that when the values are extracted from the input hash, they are
escaped and then placed into the string format used for a cookie. There is
no limitation at all on what characters may be place in the values that
are submitted for XXX::Cookie-new($r,%hash). The present situation really
is a bug in implementation due to the nature of the C lib used to process
the value portion of the cookie string. I suspect the same is true about
the cookie name since it is processed in a similar way in CGI::Cookie.
We're not discussing what is allowable in the cookie itself, only the
compatibility of the Apache::Cookie vs CGI::Cookie implementation on which
it is patterned.
Michael
Re: modules and pragmas - part II
On Sep 24, 2002 at 23:14:02 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At the first request each instance prints out the no_xhtml-header, but
at the second call the no_xhtml-pragma is forgotten and the
xhtml-header is printed out.
Is this a problem in the CGI-module or is there a deeper reason for
this in mod_perl ?
The problem lies in CGI.pm itself. It installs a cleanup
handler which resets $CGI::XHTML to 1 after each request...
sub new {
Apache-request-register_cleanup(\CGI::_reset_globals);
}
sub _reset_globals { initialize_globals() };
sub initialize_globals {
$XHTML = 1;
}
So you'll need to set $CGI::XHTML=0 every time you call
CGI-new to get it to work right.
--rick
error compiling mod_perl-1.99_05 with Apache 2.0.42
Hi, I have installed Apache 2.0.42. When I run the configuration script: perl Makefile.PL MP_AP_PREFIX=$HOME/httpd/prefork MP_INST_APACHE2=1 I got error: Unable to determine server version. I believe the bug is in /mod_perl-1.99_05/lib/Apache/Build.pm Line 746: next unless /^\#define\s+AP_SERVER_BASEREVISION\s+\(.*)\/; It expect a line of integers in double quote. While in this version of Apache include/ap_release.h, the #define line is: #define AP_SERVER_BASEREVISION AP_SERVER_MINORREVISION . AP_SERVER_PATCHLEVEL Therefore, it won't be able to find the correct version of the server. Yue __ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com
Help with Install
Hi I am totally new to modperl, in fact i have not even installed it yet. i want to install Mod perl 2.0 with Apache 2.0.42. I am not sure i understand the perl preReqs in the install docs. I have perl 5.6.1 without thread support. Am I good to go or do I need to build perl again. Also is what is mpm and is 'mpm=prefork' necessary in the apache build config? Any other tips from anyone with a similar setup is appreciated. Thank You attachment: winmail.dat
Re: Help with Install
- Original Message - From: Jim Kipp [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Also is what is mpm and is 'mpm=prefork' necessary in the apache build config? Any other tips from anyone with a similar setup is appreciated. prefork is the way it comes stock, what you probably want is mpm=worker for the threaded version. I notice there is also an option in ./configure called 'threadpool' for the mpm, but its not defined either there or in the website documentation.. i'm in the same boat as you though, trying to find the appropriate setup to use for apache 2.0. in my case i think i can get it working if /usr/bin/perl is my upgraded perl installation, but i'm so far testing with /usr/bin/perl-5.8.0 and /usr/bin/perl-5.8.0-threaded installed, with /usr/bin/perl still pointing to 5.6.0. I was able to get the perl modules DBD, sybase/freettds, etc, running on each of these three independent installations so now I'm trying to get modperl 1.99/2.0 built correctly with the latter two so I can compare mod_perl.so from the 5.8.0 threaded and non-threaded versions in different apache installations.
