On Sun, 7 Apr 2002, GUMMALAM,MOHAN (HP-Cupertino,ex2) wrote:
So does it mean that you (as in apache.org) have access to a 11i version
1.5 (IA64) box? If so, thats good news. Otherwise, I could arrange an
access to an IPF box for one of the apache.org folks. Please do let me
know!
If no
Sander Temme brought up some valid points in Bugzilla about
using libtool from icarus for releasing. FreeBSD's ports
are clinging to libtool-1.3.4 which doesn't work on OS X.
So, we have a build that doesn't work out of the box on OS X.
Can someone who knows what they are doing please add a
On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 11:38:34PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hate to be a spoilfun - but this GA tendency feels a bit..
sudden to me :-)
Yes, I have the same feeling. After all, on my FreeBSD-4.5 the server
has never been able to run stable enough to use it for anything.
On Sun, 7 Apr 2002, Dale Ghent wrote:
On Sat, 6 Apr 2002, Yusuf Goolamabbas wrote:
| Well, That seems to be the view if one reads the following threads at
| the postgres mailing list and Sun's developer connection
|
| http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2002-04/msg00103.php
|
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 01:13:17AM +0100, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
BTW, OS/X freaks, is there interest in a bundle layout for Apache2? If you
check out /System/Library/Frameworks/JavaVM.framework/ you'll see what I
mean...
Hey, that's cool stuff. You could have Apache 1.3 and 2.0 in the
same
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 02:59:17PM -0500, Edward S. Marshall wrote:
Don't forget that glibc (and a few other library) versions matter too,
if you go the route of not specifying distribution versions.
Specifically glibc matters almost more so than the kernel version.
I'd prefer if we did it by
Graham Leggett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| 7195|Opn|Blk|2002-03-18|mod_proxy removes Set-cookie headers |
This bug is fixed - how does one update bugzilla? Is there an idiots
guide anywhere?
Create a new account with your email addy, log in, and
GOMEZ Henri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-Directory @@ServerRoot@@/@rel_errordir@
+Directory @rel_errordir@
Those will screw up the whole httpd.conf in some cases... You should really
use @exp_..dir@...
Pier
Hi Pier,
I agree that many site put everything under ServerRoot,
but when you specify in config.layout that DocumentRoot
goes under /var/www2/html, you don't want to see the final
httpd.conf under /etc/httpd2/var/www2/html
FHS is very clear on where to deploy such datas and split
Nota also in the 1.3.24 Makefile.tmpl,
the usefull vars :
conf_user, conf_group, conf_serveradmin, conf_servername
-
Henri Gomez ___[_]
EMAIL : [EMAIL PROTECTED](. .)
PGP KEY : 697ECEDD...oOOo..(_)..oOOo...
PGP Fingerprint : 9DF8 1EA8
+ Platform Avail. Volunteer
+
--
+ Mandrake 8.1 no Ryan Bloom
+ FreeBSD 4.1 no Ryan Bloom
+ OS X 10.1.3/Darwin 5.3no Jim Jagielski
When trying to use shmcb I've got :
mod_ssl cannot allocate shared memory error
It works fine with dbm
Any idea ?
-Original Message-
From: GOMEZ Henri
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 6:08 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: 2.0.35 binaries for Linux boxes
I agree that many site
At 09:50 AM 04/08/2002, Ryan Bloom wrote:
Ok, I've got two versions of httpd-2.0.35-i686-pc-linux.tar.gz, one
from a 2.2.18 RedHat 7.0 machine, and the other from a 2.4.9
RedHat 7.2
machine. What do I do with these now? How do I sign them? (I need
to
put my public key in the KEYS
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 03:00:45AM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
Specifically glibc matters almost more so than the kernel version.
I'd prefer if we did it by distro. -- what time zone am i in?
I can see this as being a big issue. Unfortunately, binbuild doesn't
spit out tarballs with
GOMEZ Henri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree that many site put everything under ServerRoot,
but when you specify in config.layout that DocumentRoot
goes under /var/www2/html, you don't want to see the final
httpd.conf under /etc/httpd2/var/www2/html
Yeah... Ok...
That's why I said to
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:41:33AM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote:
I think that's all Ryan was saying. Besides, more important than
having
your key in the KEYS file is having good trust connectivity to the
rest of the HTTP Project committers.
Nope, you can't ship them unless the key is in the
I'm trying to get a PHP4 OS/2 port working with Apache 2.0.35 but have hit
a problem that may need a filtering guru to fix. I'm working with the 4.2.0
branch as that's what's slated to be released before long.
The problem I've found is that the SG(server_context), which holds a
pointer to data
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Greg Ames wrote:
...looks like a problem with cleaning up an mmap bucket. This is from
/usr/local/apache2.0.35/corefiles/httpd.core.3 ; .4 and .5 are the same
problem.
#0 apr_pool_cleanup_kill (p=0x8152f08, data=0x8152eb8,
cleanup_fn=0x280cc700 mmap_cleanup) at
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Ryan Bloom wrote:
If you key isn't already in the KEYS file, you can't release those
binaries.
Sure you can. The KEYS file is not part of the distribution tarball
anymore.
--Cliff
--
Cliff Woolley
[EMAIL
Greg Ames wrote:
...looks like a problem with cleaning up an mmap bucket. This is from
/usr/local/apache2.0.35/corefiles/httpd.core.3 ; .4 and .5 are the same problem.
#0 apr_pool_cleanup_kill (p=0x8152f08, data=0x8152eb8,
cleanup_fn=0x280cc700 mmap_cleanup) at apr_pools.c:1669
#1
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Cliff Woolley wrote:
...looks like a problem with cleaning up an mmap bucket. This is from
/usr/local/apache2.0.35/corefiles/httpd.core.3 ; .4 and .5 are the same
problem.
In this function:
APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_mmap_dup(apr_mmap_t **new_mmap,
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Greg Ames wrote:
It sounds reasonable, but I'm easily convinced...you're the bucketmeister.
Ha. ;-) Actually I think I see a number of potential problems in
apr/mmap/unix/mmap.c. I'm working on a patch and I'll post it here.
--Cliff
Cliff Woolley wrote:
As a side note, the buckets code is okay because (and it even has a
comment to this effect), it assumes that apr_mmap_delete() will do the
Right Thing, and if the mmap is not owned or already deleted, it will just
be a no-op.
Sorry, I didn't notice before you pointed it
It has not yet been signed by anybody.
Brad
Brad Nicholes
Senior Software Engineer
Novell, Inc., a leading provider of Net business solutions
http://www.novell.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Monday, April 08, 2002 1:01:31 PM
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 06:51:04PM -, Brad Nicholes wrote:
bnicholes
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 03:25:39PM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Hopefully, the next ApacheCon will afford an op for mega signing :)
*ahem* When will the next ApacheCon be? -- justin
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:04:35AM -0400, Greg Ames wrote:
IMO httpd-2.0.35 was shoved out the door too quickly. What happened to our 3
days on daedalus rule? That's not important if we think it's time for a GA?
Well, I agree with you. I think we should have been a bit more
conservative
Most likely Nov 2002.
Doesn't help out now, I know.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 03:25:39PM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Hopefully, the next ApacheCon will afford an op for mega signing :)
*ahem* When will the next ApacheCon be? -- justin
--
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
Joshua Slive [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
reports. For that, just ask Piere to give you admin access.
Pier :P
I knew I was going to screw that up, but I was too lazy to check ;-)
Johsua.
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Most likely Nov 2002.
Doesn't help out now, I know.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 03:25:39PM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Hopefully, the next ApacheCon will afford an op for mega signing :)
*ahem* When will the next
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 03:50:40PM -0400, Cliff Woolley wrote:
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Most likely Nov 2002.
Oh great. When were we going to be told that? August really
works better for me. November is just going to suck. I'm really
going to be leery about taking a week
I've tried several makes from clean trees and continue to receive this
error.
I'm setting default project to InstallBin and building apache.exe
I checked out the latest from CVS on Sunday.
TIA,
Dwayne
Configuration: mod_ssl - Win32 Debug
Generating
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
Perhaps we httpd people should get together before November.
Are enough core people up for a meeting before then?
+1
--
Cliff Woolley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Charlottesville, VA
From: Cliff Woolley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 08 April 2002 23:03
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
Perhaps we httpd people should get together before November.
Are enough core people up for a meeting before then?
+1
I would like this very much, but I'm afraid
Cliff Woolley wrote:
Greg, can you try this patch on daedalus for me? (sorry if there were line
wraps)
OK, it's running on port 8092, and passes everything I know how/remember to
throw at it in test mode. I'll put it into production after band practice
tonight when I have time to watch it
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
FINAL RELEASE SHOWSTOPPERS:
+* mod_autoindex does not load on AIX because symbol
+ ap_subreq_core_filter_handle is not being properly exported.
+ Jeff is working on this.
This fix should take care of it (thanks, Brian!):
NETWARE:
We didn't have this particular problem since mod_autoindex is a
built in module for us. But ap_subreq_core_filter is also not being
exported on NetWare. I will try to get this fixed. The problem that we
had was a memory leak due to the fack that a call to
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Most likely Nov 2002.
Doesn't help out now, I know.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 03:25:39PM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Hopefully, the next ApacheCon will afford an
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Most likely Nov 2002.
Is this authoritative, or speculation? I am trying to schedule going to
Paraguay for my brother's wedding on the week after the week when I
understood ApacheCon to be. Something authoritative would be handy, so
that I can buy
I think this has been mentioned here before, but currently mod_status
has issues being compiled against one mpm and run under another. The
issue is that we index directly into the scoreboard. There are accessor
functions in scoreboard.c that were added to resolve this. This patch
modifies
Justin Erenkrantz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Especially now that we went GA on 2.0, we should meet to discuss
2.1 or 3.0... Waiting until Nov will just suck. -- justin
I'm going to get a gun now! :) Before talking about 2.1, I (and I know I'm
voicing concerns of _a_lot_ of people) would
Nov 2002 is the current baseline that we Planners are working towards.
Security Travel is looking at hotels and venues as well for that
time frame. We even have some candidate dates as well.
Speaking as an ApacheCon planner, it's pretty authoritative :)
Rich Bowen wrote:
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002,
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:12:30AM +0100, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
Justin Erenkrantz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Especially now that we went GA on 2.0, we should meet to discuss
2.1 or 3.0... Waiting until Nov will just suck. -- justin
I'm going to get a gun now! :) Before talking about
I don't know how strongly I feel about this, but I think we
deserve to discuss this now that we have a GA.
Should at some point we switch httpd-2.0 to a Review-then-Commit
model? If so, when? If not, why not?
I guess I'm scared that someone will start adding things that
will destabilize the
At 5:06 PM -0700 4/8/02, Ryan Morgan wrote:
I think this has been mentioned here before, but currently mod_status
has issues being compiled against one mpm and run under another. The
issue is that we index directly into the scoreboard. There are accessor
functions in scoreboard.c that were
Justin Erenkrantz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, there are a number of issues that I think we'd need to hash
out before thinking about what comes next. Should we open 2.1
now? I don't think so. But, should we in three or four months?
Perhaps - it depends how 2.0 goes.
Good... You scared
I'm -1 for RTC until we have a CTR development branch (2.1 or whatnot),
and I don't think we should branch for at least a few more revs of 2.0 GA.
In my mind we alrady require public review for any big changes or new
features, so switching to RTC means that we are nearing the end of the
lifecycle
-1
We have been very selective in who gets commit authority and should problems arise, I
think we (the royal we) will be able to brow beat the offender into line :-) CTR has
works fine for Apache 1.3 for a number of years.
Bill
I don't know how strongly I feel about this, but I think we
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
Well, there are a number of issues that I think we'd need to hash
out before thinking about what comes next. Should we open 2.1
now? I don't think so. But, should we in three or four months?
Perhaps - it depends how 2.0 goes.
I think we also need a more solid
Could we have a README.1st or something on /dist/httpd that describes
critical issues for certain OSs?
Is there already an appropriate file for this type of info?
--
Jeff Trawick | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Born in Roswell... married an alien...
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:50:36PM -0400, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Could we have a README.1st or something on /dist/httpd that describes
critical issues for certain OSs?
Is there already an appropriate file for this type of info?
Previously, we included them in the announcement. -- justin
On 8 Apr 2002, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Could we have a README.1st or something on /dist/httpd that describes
critical issues for certain OSs?
Is there already an appropriate file for this type of info?
There was, but it was terribly out of date so I trashed it, if I remember
correctly. Why
On 8 Apr 2002, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Could we have a README.1st or something on /dist/httpd that describes
critical issues for certain OSs?
Sure. You might want to put a link to it in that newly added section of
HEADER.html right under where it says Apache 2.0.35 is the best available
version,
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
Previously, we included them in the announcement. -- justin
Yeah, but that was only really useful when we did it *before* sending out
the announcement. How many people would think to go back and re-read it?
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 05:38:40PM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
...
Should at some point we switch httpd-2.0 to a Review-then-Commit
model? If so, when? If not, why not?
Short answer: no, not for a while, see below.
The dev guidelines state:
All product changes to the currently
Jeff Trawick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Could we have a README.1st or something on /dist/httpd that describes
critical issues for certain OSs?
Is there already an appropriate file for this type of info?
After reading your responses (thanks!) I added README.html in the
patch directory for
On 8 Apr 2002, Jeff Trawick wrote:
* OS X
1. up-to-date libtool needed
Install libtool 1.4.2 separately. Once the Apache source
distribution has been unpacked, run ./buildconf before ./configure.
I was under the impression that anyone who had the
When generating a double bounce error message, that is one that says
Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an
ErrorDocument to handle the request., it comes out as text/plain or
whatever the DefaultType is set to.
When the ErrorDocument IS found, I'm also seeing
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 08:13:31PM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote:
We have never before frozen an API, and I would prefer that we didn't
freeze this one. If an API needs to change, then it should be allowed
to change. The important thing is that we don't change APIs just for
the sake of changing
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
My concern is that when we make all of the renames to APR (or
any other changes), we'll be killing our third-parties who tried to
Simple renames I can handle. That's what apr_compat.h is for. Other
changes should be much more scrutinized IMO.
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 08:13:31PM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote:
We have never before frozen an API, and I would prefer that we
didn't
freeze this one. If an API needs to change, then it should be
allowed
to change. The important thing is that we don't change APIs just
for
the sake of
Any Mac OS X folks watching now? Don't we need something like this in
/dist/httpd/patches/apply_to_2.0.35/README.html?
Here.
* OS X
1. up-to-date libtool needed
Install libtool 1.4.2 separately. Once the Apache source
distribution has been unpacked, run
Dwayne Miller wrote:
Generating ssl_expr_parse.c/.h from ssl_expr_parse.y
'sed' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
operable program or batch file.
'sed' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
I think you need to have sed(.exe) in your path.
--
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:45:58PM -0700, Sander Temme wrote:
But this requires a user-installed patch upon a user-installed libtool. I'm
in favour of the first option.
All of these options suck since they can't use any of the default
libtools. I've got a tarball of 2.0.35 that I've rolled on
Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Win32, Apache 2.0.36-dev, PHP 4.3.0-dev (both current CVS)
The crash seems to be gone now.
However, the following compiler warnings remain:
c:\Apache2\include\apr.h(334): warning C4142:
benign redefinition of type
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
I'll place it somewhere once I get my gpg key off of one of my
other machines. If we want, we can place it in /dist
We've done this before, so +1 for /dist/httpd/httpd-2.0.35-darwin.tar.gz
(Just to make it obvious, since darwin is AFAIK the
Can we *please* apply this patch to the libtool on icarus?? That would
make the lives of we httpd'ers so much easier...
Thanks,
Cliff
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2002 21:45:58 -0700
From: Sander Temme [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL
Two signed packages are available, immediately, for download
and initial testing by our more experienced members on this
list. They include the initial test release of the Apache 2.0.35
Windows .msi installer;
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/apache_2.0.35-win32-x86-no_ssl.msi
and the source
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 02:13:12AM -0400, Cliff Woolley wrote:
We've done this before, so +1 for /dist/httpd/httpd-2.0.35-darwin.tar.gz
(Just to make it obvious, since darwin is AFAIK the primary audience for
that tarball. If we find other platforms that *need* that version of
libtool,
68 matches
Mail list logo
