> >> Why won't you post mod_gzip 2.0 *today*?
>
> Because Apache 2.x is not STABLE, not In BETA and the API set is not yet
> FROZEN... When it is, we will release mod_gzip as a third party module,
> which we will support and maintain.
I have stayed far away from this thread, but this just doesn't
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 05:43:53PM -0700, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
>>Because from context to context you mean to change the server config. What
>>works in one Location doesn't work for another, what is good for one directory
>>isn't good for another.
>>
>>You nee
Hi,
I was wondering if somebody could update the status of mod_ssl in
the STATUS file. I'm providing my inputs - but if you have a more
appropriate comment, please go ahead and update it.
Thanks
-Madhu
Index: STATUS
===
R
"Ryan Bloom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 06 September 2001 11:47, Bill Stoddard wrote:
>>> Ryan Bloom wrote:
We have no control over APR. APR will not make a release just because
the web server wants it to. Apache needs to either use an already
released APR, or it ne
I thought I'd sent this mail earlier.. I never got the mail back - 'just
forwarding it again.. (sorry if it's a duplicate)
-Madhu
--
Hi,
I was wondering if somebody could update the status of mod_ssl in
the STATUS file. I'm providing my inputs - but if you have a more
appro
"Aaron Bannert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This patch is pretty self explanatory...
>
> -aaron
>
>
> Index: support/apachectl.in
> ===
> RCS file: /home/cvspublic/httpd-2.0/support/apachectl.in,v
> retrieving revision 1.3
> diff
On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 05:43:53PM -0700, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Because from context to context you mean to change the server config. What
> works in one Location doesn't work for another, what is good for one directory
> isn't good for another.
>
> You need to be able to replace those c
From: "Justin Erenkrantz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 5:28 PM
> On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 12:06:18AM -0700, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> > Push...Filters is a very interesting idea that warrents more consideration,
> > especially in terms of subrequests (Push/Pop could
[ Is it just me or is this message really like 5 or 6? I reread it
and saw all of the stuff at the bottom. ]
On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 12:06:18AM -0700, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Push...Filters is a very interesting idea that warrents more consideration,
> especially in terms of subrequests (P
On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 07:39:39PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I still don't think you answered the REAL question, though,
> and that is why, in light of everything else going on at the
> moment trying to get this 2.0 puppy at least to a BETA
> tarball so many more people can TEST it ( don't
In a message dated 01-09-06 19:30:47 EDT, Justin wrote...
> I think this functionality belongs in the core (not as a
> sub-project or as a separate standalone module). That's it.
Fair enough. Thanks for the quick reply.
You won't get any argument from me on that point.
I was saying that (ove
On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> > Anytime you put something into the core,
> > you take the very real chance of delaying the core server.
>
> Or, as some have suggested - stick it in modules/experimental?
As Ken pointed out, modules in the experimental directory have
historically
On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> You will find if you read the archives, that we have cancelled
> releases in the past, because a single module did not work correctly.
> Anytime you put something into the core, you take the very real chance
> of delaying the core server.
This is true enou
On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 07:04:43PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Justin... you are the one who kicked this football down
> the field in the first place at this point in time so it's your
> turn for the hotseat for a moment.
>
> Can you explain why, in so many words, this is such
> a house on
After the update from suse linux 7.0 to 7.2 there`s a discrepancy with my
apache which is running a program with php and mysql.
When I hit the back-button of the browser, the browser tells me, that there
is data missing. But the program is designed to use the back button of the
browser.
Is there
For Apache 1.3, mod_tls is in src/os/netware and I don't really see any reason to
change anything there since it has been shipping for quite some time in this manner.
We have not yet checked this module in for Apache 2.0, but when we do I will certainly
rename it to something else as you s
Hi Justin...
Kevin Kiley here...
Justin wrote...
> FWIW, we're discussing Ian's mod_gz not Remote Communication's
> mod_gzip since an Apache 2.0 version of mod_gzip has not been
> submitted to the Apache Group for inclusion. -- justin
Jim Jagielski asked...
> Can I ask why the rush? Let'
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>
> FWIW, I don't thinking creating a sub-project for one file makes
> a lot of sense. -- justin
I agree with Justin on this, and disagree with FirstBill and Ryan.
--
#kenP-)}
Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Golux.Com/coar/
Author, developer, opinionist
Ryan Bloom wrote:
>
> If the module is a part of the server, then it must work
> before the server is production ready. You can't have a
> module that doesn't work in a server that is going GA,
> it doesn't make sense. You will find if you read the
> archives, that we have cancelled releases in
On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 03:25:47PM -0700, MATHIHALLI,MADHUSUDAN (HP-Cupertino,ex1)
wrote:
> you're definitely right. they are not CPU-bound, but more bandwidth bound..
> But my point here is that does it make sense to compare mod_ssl with
> mod_gzip.. They are 2 totally differnet entities - one o
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 11:27 AM
> slive 01/09/06 11:27:57
>
> Modified:docs/conf httpd-std.conf httpd-win.conf
> Added: docs/docroot index.html.nn
> Log:
> Add Norwegian Nynorsk translation of welcome page.
Don't forget index.html.v
you're definitely right. they are not CPU-bound, but more bandwidth bound..
But my point here is that does it make sense to compare mod_ssl with
mod_gzip.. They are 2 totally differnet entities - one of them is a
requirement, and the other is welcome (if available)
-Madhu
-Original Message--
On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 03:03:16PM -0700, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> If it's stable and works, but clearly isn't a 'known quantity' in production
> servers, it must land in modules/experimental until it's interaction with the
> many clients is well understood. Compiling isn't the issue, usabil
On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 06:06:58PM -0400, MATHIHALLI,MADHUSUDAN (HP-Cupertino,ex1)
wrote:
> Hi,
> 'not sure if my views hold any ground here - but I believe we should not be
> linking mod_gzip and mod_ssl here..
>
> mod_ssl - it's one of the modules without which lots of users (especially
> the
From: "Ryan Bloom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 2:45 PM
> To clarify, I am removing mod_tls from 2.0. I saw mod_tls, and didn't connect it
> with Apache 1.3. I will not remove mod_tls from 1.3 this week.
+1 for removing /modules/tls (I was confused as well, sorry.)
Hi,
'not sure if my views hold any ground here - but I believe we should not be
linking mod_gzip and mod_ssl here..
mod_ssl - it's one of the modules without which lots of users (especially
the e-commerce uses) would not even consider using Apache (forget the
performance). It's pretty much a REQU
From: "Justin Erenkrantz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 2:56 PM
> On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 02:49:56PM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > If the module is a part of the server, then it must work before the server
> > is production ready. You can't have a module that doesn't wor
From: "Ian Holsman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 1:36 PM
> I've found a small problem (probably more a documentation problem)
>
> only works for 'file-based' storage.
>
> so, using it to set the INCLUDES filter on a page delivered by mod-proxy
> doesn't work.
P
On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 02:49:56PM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> If the module is a part of the server, then it must work before the server
> is production ready. You can't have a module that doesn't work in a server
> that is going GA, it doesn't make sense. You will find if you read the
> archive
From: "Ian Holsman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 9:36 AM
> On Thu, 2001-09-06 at 08:12, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> >
> > The map_to_storage hook should be an optimization that I want to use, not
> > a requirement that I HAVE to use.
> >
>
> you don't need to use it. look at
On Thursday 06 September 2001 14:45, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 02:39:18PM -0400, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> > +1 on the veto :-)
> >
> > I am a strong +1 in favor of making this a subproject and probably
> > rolling it into a post 2.0 release. The presence of mod_gz in the cor
On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 02:39:18PM -0400, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> +1 on the veto :-)
>
> I am a strong +1 in favor of making this a subproject and probably rolling it into a
>post
> 2.0 release. The presence of mod_gz in the core now -will- impact folks who are
>working on
> stabilizing the serv
On Thursday 06 September 2001 14:17, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> From: "Ryan Bloom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 8:09 AM
>
> > On Thursday 06 September 2001 07:48, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > bnicholes01/09/06 07:48:46
> > >
> > > Modified:src/os/netware
Ryan Bloom wrote:
>On Thursday 06 September 2001 09:29, Greg Marr wrote:
>
>>At 11:50 AM 09/06/2001, Brian Pane wrote:
>>
>>>This patch eliminates some run-time conversion of method names to
>>>numbers (something that I noticed while looking through function
>>>call profiles).
>>>
>>>RCS file: /h
From: "Cliff Woolley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 8:42 AM
> On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Ryan Bloom wrote:
>
> > It seems that most people on this list were surprised to see mod_ldap in
> > the core. We all expected a small LDAP library in apr-util, and nothing
> > in the cor
On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 02:15:22PM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Thursday 06 September 2001 14:10, Aaron Bannert wrote:
>
> No, this should not be done. According to the default Apache layout, the Apache
> binary goes into @prefix@/bin/httpd. We use the variable sbindir, but it is still
> the b
From: "Ryan Bloom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 8:09 AM
> On Thursday 06 September 2001 07:48, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > bnicholes01/09/06 07:48:46
> >
> > Modified:src/os/netware mod_tls.c
> > Log:
> > Added the ability for MOD_TLS to take advantage of
On Thu, 2001-09-06 at 14:10, Aaron Bannert wrote:
> This patch is pretty self explanatory...
>
hmm.
I think the current CVS head is working
(if you don't specify the layout as a argument)
> -aaron
>
>
> Index: support/apachectl.in
> =
On Thursday 06 September 2001 14:10, Aaron Bannert wrote:
No, this should not be done. According to the default Apache layout, the Apache
binary goes into @prefix@/bin/httpd. We use the variable sbindir, but it is still
the bin directory. If it is actually being installed into the sbin directo
This patch is pretty self explanatory...
-aaron
Index: support/apachectl.in
===
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/httpd-2.0/support/apachectl.in,v
retrieving revision 1.3
diff -u -r1.3 apachectl.in
--- support/apachectl.in2001/05/0
From: "dean gaudet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 9:17 PM
> On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Brian Pane wrote:
>
> > * memset() is called mostly from apr_pcalloc(), which in turn is
> > used in too many places to yield any easy optimization opportunities.
>
> sometimes folks are
FYI, The reason that MOD_TLS exists on NetWare is because all of the SSL support
is embedded in our Winsock layer. MOD_TLS doesn't actually do any encryption or
contain any encryption code. It simply an enabling module that makes a WSAIoctl()
call to tell Winsock to enable SSL on a given
I've found a small problem (probably more a documentation problem)
only works for 'file-based' storage.
so, using it to set the INCLUDES filter on a page delivered by mod-proxy
doesn't work.
Also .. on another documentation point.
it is possible for mod-include to NOT check for 'options' incl
On Thursday 06 September 2001 11:47, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> > Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > > We have no control over APR. APR will not make a release just because
> > > the web server wants it to. Apache needs to either use an already
> > > released APR, or it needs to specify a date/time to check out
Got it, thanks anyway.
Hany
-Original Message-
From: Farag, Hany M (Hany)
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 3:00 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: apxs Error
Hi,
I'm getting this error when using apxs (apache 2.0.24):
./apxs -i -a -c iCAP.h iCAP_protocol.h mod_iCAP.h co.h co_
removal
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
Ryan Bloom wrote:
>
>
> It seems that most people on this list were surprised to see mod_ldap in
> the core. We all expected a small LDAP library in apr-util, and nothing
> in the core. Since there are at least two people who have mentioned that
> they would have voted -1 for mod_ldap, can I g
Can I ask why the rush? Let's get 2.0 out the door.
--
===
Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
"A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order
wil
On Thursday 06 September 2001 12:01, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> > Bill Stoddard wrote:
> > > I am a strong +1 in favor of making this a subproject and probably
> > > rolling it into a
>
> post
>
> > > 2.0 release. The presence of mod_gz in the core now -will- impact folks
> > > who are
>
> working on
At 02:47 PM 09/06/2001, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> > Well - the vote on the table is to take the LDAP code out of
> Apache v2.0
> > - but the next question is when it's removed, what do we do with
> it?
>
>I will probably be a user of mod_ldap, but right now, I am inclined
>to remove it from the
>c
On Thursday 06 September 2001 11:54, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> > On Thursday 06 September 2001 09:36, Ian Holsman wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2001-09-06 at 08:12, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > > > > > I have some big problems with the way that location walk and
> > > > > > directory walk work now, BTW, because if I
Bill Stoddard wrote:
> +1 on mod_ssl and mod_proxy being included in the core. The last vote we had also
> supported mod_proxy in the core. As far as I am concerned, mod_proxy can go in
>today...
We did get the +1's we needed...
How about this: I will commit the v2.0 mod_proxy back to the core
> Bill Stoddard wrote:
>
> > I am a strong +1 in favor of making this a subproject and probably rolling it into
>a
post
> > 2.0 release. The presence of mod_gz in the core now -will- impact folks who are
working on
> > stabilizing the server.
>
> What about putting it in the experimental directo
Hi,
I'm getting this error when using apxs (apache 2.0.24):
./apxs -i -a -c iCAP.h iCAP_protocol.h mod_iCAP.h co.h co_protocol.c
iCAP_protocol.c mod_iCAP.c
libtool --silent --mode=compile gcc -g -O2 -pthread
-I/usr/local/apache2/include -c -o co_protocol.lo co_protocol.c && touch
co_protocol.sl
Bill Stoddard wrote:
> I am a strong +1 in favor of making this a subproject and probably rolling it into a
>post
> 2.0 release. The presence of mod_gz in the core now -will- impact folks who are
>working on
> stabilizing the server.
What about putting it in the experimental directory? This wa
> On Thursday 06 September 2001 09:36, Ian Holsman wrote:
> > On Thu, 2001-09-06 at 08:12, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > > > > I have some big problems with the way that location walk and
> > > > > directory walk work now, BTW, because if I write a module that
> > > > > doesn't get pages from the filesys
> Ryan Bloom wrote:
>
> > We have no control over APR. APR will not make a release just because
> > the web server wants it to. Apache needs to either use an already released
> > APR, or it needs to specify a date/time to check out APR.
>
> We have no control over libc either, and yet we use th
+1 on the veto :-)
I am a strong +1 in favor of making this a subproject and probably rolling it into a
post
2.0 release. The presence of mod_gz in the core now -will- impact folks who are
working on
stabilizing the server.
Bill
> * On 2001-09-06 at 11:51,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTE
Ryan Bloom wrote:
> Just ran a few tests with OtherBill. IIS 5.0's default behavior, at least, is
> not to gzip an html file. We already support gzip encoding today. This
> discussion is about on-the-fly gzip compression.
I tried to negotiate a gzip compressed document from a dynamic ASP file
At 01:32 PM 09/06/2001, Stas Bekman wrote:
>Also the regex that does s/(foo)/{foo}/ is cleaner in case someone was
>doing $(foo)_bar with the current patch, this will break, since it
>makes
>$foo_bar, whereas it should be better ${foo}_bar.
A regexp is overkill in this case, assuming that the in
On Thursday 06 September 2001 09:56, Graham Leggett wrote:
Just ran a few tests with OtherBill. IIS 5.0's default behavior, at least, is
not to gzip an html file. We already support gzip encoding today. This
discussion is about on-the-fly gzip compression.
Ryan
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Stas Bekman wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Ryan Bloom wrote:
>
> > On Thursday 06 September 2001 10:03, Stas Bekman wrote:
> > > On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > > > On Thursday 06 September 2001 09:35, Stas Bekman wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, jean-frederic cler
On Wed, 2001-09-05 at 19:11, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 06:46:45PM -0700, Brian Pane wrote:
> > Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> > [...]
getting back to the original patch
to find_start_sequence.
does anyone have any comments on this?
I'm seeing lower CPU utilization when using
apxs is working again.
I'm getting the CORE dump form my hourly test cron job.
as soon as the core dump is fixed I'll aim the email to dev@
(don't worry it only mails when there is a change in test results.
not every hour)
On Thu, 2001-09-06 at 10:07, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Thursday 06 September
On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> Ok, now, I might be a complete idiot, but I'm hearing way-too-many
> complaints about apxs not exporting the LD_SHLIB value under Linux.
>
> Did anyone encountered this problem before? Or can I safely assume that
> apxs -q LD_SHLIB = apxs -q CC
This d
At 12:58 PM 09/06/2001, Ryan Bloom wrote:
>> Weren't these "method numbers" recently removed so that there are
>> no "standard" methods, and all the methods are added the same way
>> at run time?
>
>In order to keep backwards compat, keep the patch small, and keep
>the performance high for the
Ryan Bloom wrote:
> You missed my point. Your original message said that the first step was to
> release APR. That is incorrect. We do not release APR on this list, and if
> that is our first step, then it is broken. We can either use a previously released
> version of APR, or we can use a ti
On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Thursday 06 September 2001 10:03, Stas Bekman wrote:
> > On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > > On Thursday 06 September 2001 09:35, Stas Bekman wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, jean-frederic clere wrote:
> > > > > It fixes the problem I had, than
On Thursday 06 September 2001 09:42, Graham Leggett wrote:
> Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > We have no control over APR. APR will not make a release just because
> > the web server wants it to. Apache needs to either use an already
> > released APR, or it needs to specify a date/time to check out APR.
>
On Thursday 06 September 2001 10:03, Stas Bekman wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > On Thursday 06 September 2001 09:35, Stas Bekman wrote:
> > > On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, jean-frederic clere wrote:
> > > > It fixes the problem I had, thanks - Do not forget to commit it -
> > >
> > > I d
On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Thursday 06 September 2001 09:35, Stas Bekman wrote:
> > On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, jean-frederic clere wrote:
> > > It fixes the problem I had, thanks - Do not forget to commit it -
> >
> > I don't have commit access to httpd. Ryan will probably commit for me
- Original Message -
From: "barries" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 1:30 PM
Subject: [PATCH] add Push...Filter, alter Set...Filter
> This patch makes Set...Filter replace all configed filters and
> introduces Push...Filters to provide the curren
On Thursday 06 September 2001 09:35, Stas Bekman wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, jean-frederic clere wrote:
> > It fixes the problem I had, thanks - Do not forget to commit it -
>
> I don't have commit access to httpd. Ryan will probably commit for me :)
Doug beat me to it. :-)
Ryan
__
On Thursday 06 September 2001 09:29, Greg Marr wrote:
> At 11:50 AM 09/06/2001, Brian Pane wrote:
> >This patch eliminates some run-time conversion of method names to
> >numbers (something that I noticed while looking through function
> >call profiles).
> >
> >RCS file: /home/cvspublic/httpd-2.0/s
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I am veto'ing this, for now at least. I will support making mod_gz
> a separate sub-project of httpd, and possibly rolling it into a later
> release of 2.0, but now is not the time to do this.
A separate subproject for something as small as this module sounds a
On Thursday 06 September 2001 09:36, Ian Holsman wrote:
> On Thu, 2001-09-06 at 08:12, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > > > I have some big problems with the way that location walk and
> > > > directory walk work now, BTW, because if I write a module that
> > > > doesn't get pages from the filesystem, I have
Ryan Bloom wrote:
> We have no control over APR. APR will not make a release just because
> the web server wants it to. Apache needs to either use an already released
> APR, or it needs to specify a date/time to check out APR.
We have no control over libc either, and yet we use that. Surely we
Please stop this thread.
the RC folks have decided not to submit mod_gzip 2.0.
On Thu, 2001-09-06 at 09:04, Gomez Henri wrote:
> >> Why won't you post mod_gzip 2.0 *today*?
>
> >Because Apache 2.x is not STABLE, not In BETA and the API set is not yet
> >FROZEN... When it is, we will releas
On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, jean-frederic clere wrote:
> It fixes the problem I had, thanks - Do not forget to commit it -
I don't have commit access to httpd. Ryan will probably commit for me :)
> Stas Bekman wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I made the change to the
On Thu, 2001-09-06 at 08:12, Ryan Bloom wrote:
>
> > > I have some big problems with the way that location walk and directory
> > > walk work now, BTW, because if I write a module that doesn't get pages
> > > from the filesystem, I have to catch those in the map_to_storage hook,
> > > or the serv
At 11:50 AM 09/06/2001, Brian Pane wrote:
>This patch eliminates some run-time conversion of method names to
>numbers (something that I noticed while looking through function
>call profiles).
>
>RCS file: /home/cvspublic/httpd-2.0/server/core.c,v
>-ap_allow_methods(r, MERGE_ALLOW, "GET", "OP
Ryan Bloom wrote:
> It seems that most people on this list were surprised to see mod_ldap in
> the core. We all expected a small LDAP library in apr-util, and nothing
> in the core. Since there are at least two people who have mentioned that
> they would have voted -1 for mod_ldap, can I get a
"Peter J. Cranstone" wrote:
> Because Apache 2.x is not STABLE, not In BETA and the API set is not yet
> FROZEN... When it is, we will release mod_gzip as a third party module,
> which we will support and maintain.
Why not just release a beta of mod_gzip today for v2.0 and say that it
is not yet
On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 08:40:24PM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 08:34:30PM -0700, Ian Holsman wrote:
> > I got 1 more question about the solaris implementation
> > of the Threaded/Worker MPM.
> >
> >
> > should we be called the setconcurrency flag on startup ?
> > I
Well, I finally made myself look at this and fix it. This passed the httpd-test
cases now, and it looks correct to me. I would like to apply this ASAP.
I dislike that we have to pstrdup the "" string, but we try to modify that string too
often to use a constant string.
Ryan
Index: server/req
Ok, now, I might be a complete idiot, but I'm hearing way-too-many
complaints about apxs not exporting the LD_SHLIB value under Linux.
Did anyone encountered this problem before? Or can I safely assume that
apxs -q LD_SHLIB = apxs -q CC
if the first one doesn't return the right values?
Thanks a
On Thursday 06 September 2001 08:53, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> * On 2001-09-06 at 11:51,
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> excited the electrons to say:
> > I am veto'ing this, for now at least. I will support making mod_gz
> > a separate sub-project of httpd, and possibly rol
>> Why won't you post mod_gzip 2.0 *today*?
>Because Apache 2.x is not STABLE, not In BETA and the API set is not yet
>FROZEN... When it is, we will release mod_gzip as a third party module,
>which we will support and maintain.
There is actually many alpha release, and many of then are more than
It fixes the problem I had, thanks - Do not forget to commit it -
Stas Bekman wrote:
>
> On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Ryan Bloom wrote:
>
> >
> > I made the change to the way config_vars is created, and it needs to be
> > this way for the --with-layout stuff to work correctly. We may be able to
> > fix
This patch eliminates some run-time conversion of method names to
numbers (something that I noticed while looking through function call
profiles).
--Brian
Index: include/http_request.h
===
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/httpd-2.0/include
On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Ryan Bloom wrote:
>
> It seems that most people on this list were surprised to see mod_ldap in
> the core. We all expected a small LDAP library in apr-util, and nothing
> in the core. Since there are at least two people who have mentioned that
> they would have voted -1 for
On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, Greg Stein wrote:
> mod_gz is just a little bugger off to the side that the core people don't
> have to truly worry about.
...
> It can go in now and be fixed over time.
...
> modules which have *nothing* to do with stability.
so you're saying mod_gz would go into modules/ex
* On 2001-09-06 at 11:51,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> excited the electrons to say:
>
> I am veto'ing this, for now at least. I will support making mod_gz
> a separate sub-project of httpd, and possibly rolling it into a later
> release of 2.0, but now is not the time to do thi
On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> It seems that most people on this list were surprised to see mod_ldap in
> the core. We all expected a small LDAP library in apr-util, and nothing
> in the core. Since there are at least two people who have mentioned that
> they would have voted -1 for mo
Ryan Bloom wrote:
>>>I have some big problems with the way that location walk and directory
>>>walk work now, BTW, because if I write a module that doesn't get pages
>>>from the filesystem, I have to catch those in the map_to_storage hook,
>>>or the server will 500.
>>>
>>Hmm... I'd have thought
On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Thursday 06 September 2001 07:48, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > bnicholes01/09/06 07:48:46
> >
> > Modified:src/os/netware mod_tls.c
> > Log:
> > Added the ability for MOD_TLS to take advantage of the mutual
> > authentication functionalit
On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Ryan Bloom wrote:
>
> I made the change to the way config_vars is created, and it needs to be
> this way for the --with-layout stuff to work correctly. We may be able to
> fix that problem, but we have a conflict between shell scripts and perl.
>
> We need to fix apxs to stri
On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > Hmm... I'd have thought that was the whole point of the map_to_storage
> > hook, if its name were any indication...
>
> It is, but if I am just putting together a quick module, to solve a
> problem and it generates the page itself, all I should have to
On Thursday 06 September 2001 08:09, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Thursday 06 September 2001 07:48, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > bnicholes01/09/06 07:48:46
> >
> > Modified:src/os/netware mod_tls.c
> > Log:
> > Added the ability for MOD_TLS to take advantage of the mutual
> > authenticat
On Thursday 06 September 2001 05:01, Graham Leggett wrote:
> o We release apr-x.x.x.tar.gz containing APR, which can be installed
> separately (this is the direction APR seems to be going, we should
> follow it through to it's logical conclusion).
We have no control over APR. APR will not make
1 - 100 of 125 matches
Mail list logo
