httpd-test/perl-framework STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2002/03/09 05:22:48 $]
Stuff to do:
* finish the t/TEST exit code issue (ORed with 0x2C if
framework failed)
* change existing tests that frob the DocumentRoot (e.g.,
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Wed, May 01, 2002 at 06:45:58PM -0400, Greg Ames wrote:
Do you mean Dirk and I automagically have httpd-test commit
access by virtue of being httpd committers? If so, great!
AIUI, yup.
Yes, that is correct. Other committers may be added to httpd-test
Greg Ames wrote:
What do folks think about adding mod_specweb99 (attached) as
an Apache httpd-test component? It is a module which allows
you to benchmark Apache 2.0 or 1.3 using the SPECweb99
benchmarking suite, described at http://www.spec.org/osg/web99/ .
+1
--
#kenP-)}
Ken Coar,
On Thu, 2 May 2002, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
What do folks think about adding mod_specweb99 (attached) as
an Apache httpd-test component? It is a module which allows
you to benchmark Apache 2.0 or 1.3 using the SPECweb99
benchmarking suite, described at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
gregames02/05/02 10:20:10
Log:
Initial revision
Status:
Vendor Tag: init
Release Tags: start
N httpd-test/specweb99/httpd.specweb.conf
N httpd-test/specweb99/LICENSE.txt
N httpd-test/specweb99/rc.byrd_ap
N
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 02:57:22PM -0400, Greg Ames wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
yuck. cvs import created a branch, 4 digit revision numbers, and a couple
of
useless tags. I'd like to blow this away and try again with cvs add. Is rm,
cvs remove, cvs commit on all files the best way to
Cliff Woolley wrote:
On Thu, 2 May 2002, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
Since this is brand new, you could always blow away the directories on
icarus. Your call. AIUI, if you do the cvs rm approach, when you
re-add, this version will come back out of the attic. -- justin
Right. rm the
Just rm -rf it - it is a new import anyway.
Dw
--
Dirk-Willem van Gulik
On Thu, 2 May 2002, Greg Ames wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
gregames02/05/02 10:20:10
Log:
Initial revision
Status:
Vendor Tag: init
Release Tags: start
N
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just rm -rf it - it is a new import anyway.
Dw
OK, you Justin talked me into it. The structure looks much simpler in ViewCVS
now.
Greg
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 12:34:57AM -0400, Cliff Woolley wrote:
This is a bit of a problem... I've know about it for ages and keep
forgetting. Wasn't there a patch for this at some point? I know we
discussed it a while back. At the very least, the docs need to be
updated.
There was at
What platform does not have writev() at the moment ?
Dw.
--
Dirk-Willem van Gulik
David,
Could you (or someone else) who is on a legitimate platform which does
not support writev() check if this is functional ?
Note that I also found I had to make the #ifdef/#if defined()s to make
things comply across the board.
I've tried both with and without SSL and with/without WRITEV
Ralf, do you have a mod_ssl patch for the current 1.3.25-dev proxy? Or
could you make one?
Martin
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Fujitsu Siemens
Fon: +49-89-636-46021, FAX: +49-89-636-47655 | 81730 Munich, Germany
---BeginMessage---
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi
Will do in a while :)
david
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 11:36 AM
Subject: Fixing NO_WRIVEV
David,
Could you (or someone else) who is on a legitimate platform which does
not support writev() check if this is
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
jim 02/05/02 06:28:46
Modified:src/os/unix os.c
Log:
OK. This is admittedly anal. But the whole idea behind cpp macros
is to avoid things like we know NSLINKMODULE_OPTION_NONE is 0
and making such shortcuts as this. This makes it clear what
Ben Laurie wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
jim 02/05/02 06:28:46
Modified:src/os/unix os.c
Log:
OK. This is admittedly anal. But the whole idea behind cpp macros
is to avoid things like we know NSLINKMODULE_OPTION_NONE is 0
and making such shortcuts as
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
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
Martin Kraemer wrote:
Ralf, do you have a mod_ssl patch for the current 1.3.25-dev proxy? Or
could you make one?
Is 1.3.25 not due for release already?
Regards,
Graham
--
-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]There's a moon
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
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
+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
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[I am sending to dev@ as I 1) think that this will require a source-code fix,
and 2) user@ had no help for me]
I have a problem with our apache webserver (v. 1.3.14), running on solaris 7.
A lot of our directories are auto-nfs mounted (esp. the
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 04:49:45PM -0600, David Bishop wrote:
I have a problem with our apache webserver (v. 1.3.14), running on solaris 7.
A lot of our directories are auto-nfs mounted (esp. the ~username stuff).
95% of the time it works great, however, intermittently, it will return no
On 3 May 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There seems to be an error in the handling of If-Modified-Since.
Steps to reproduce:
1. Send the following request to www.dawnorchid.com:
GET / HTTP/1.1
Host: www.dawnorchid.com
Resulting header is
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 02:07:27
On Thu, 2 May 2002, Cliff Woolley wrote:
Which *looks* okay. My best guess is that, since we're comparing
apr_time_t's, maybe mtime includes some number of microseconds and thus is
greater than the ims for the same second. Does that sound reasonable? If
so, I guess we need to divide ims,
26 matches
Mail list logo
