This patch combined with the last few patches I've posted today allow
chunked trailer support again and now passes all httpd-test cases.
What we try to do is to ensure that ap_discard_request_body() is not
called before the handler "accepts" the request and begins generating
the output. It is sti
Based on my interpretation of the RFC, I think this might be
a better way to handle the body case for MKCOL. I sort of
think this is what they were thinking rather than relying
on the request entity headers.
Thoughts? -- justin
Index: modules/dav/main/mod_dav.c
This patch switches mod_dav to use brigades for input when
handling PUT.
My one caveat with this is what to do when the filters return
an error (spec. AP_FILTER_ERROR which means that they already
took care of it). In this case, the handler should NOT generate
an error of its own and just return
On Sun, Jun 02, 2002 at 02:50:13PM -0700, Ian Holsman wrote:
> it looks like something broke recently..
> the proxy appears to be waiting for the timeout to occur before
> delivering the final bucket.
> this is most noticable when you have a page including multiple
> subrequests, all of which ar
On Sun, Jun 02, 2002 at 02:52:32PM -0700, Ian Holsman wrote:
> I've just run into this, and it is present in 2.0.36..
> the name-based sysvmem isn't appropiate as it will cause apache to
> refuse to start when you upgrade a module (forcing a reboot)
>
> a simple way to 'fix' is this it for the
I've just run into this, and it is present in 2.0.36..
the name-based sysvmem isn't appropiate as it will cause apache to
refuse to start when you upgrade a module (forcing a reboot)
a simple way to 'fix' is this it for the server to write out in the
error message what sharedmem segment it is
it looks like something broke recently..
the proxy appears to be waiting for the timeout to occur before
delivering the final bucket.
this is most noticable when you have a page including multiple
subrequests, all of which are reverse proxied
to recreate
Proxypass http://yourhost
an
Is it permissible for a subrequest (r->main != NULL) to read
input data from the client?
My current thought is only the original request can do that.
Am I right or am I wrong? -- justin
+---+
| Bugzilla Bug ID |
| +-+
| | Status: UNC=Unconfirmed NEW=New ASS=Assigned
+---+
| Bugzilla Bug ID |
| +-+
| | Status: UNC=Unconfirmed NEW=New ASS=Assigned
Greg Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, May 31, 2002 at 08:50:14PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > trawick 2002/05/31 13:50:14
> >
> > Modified:modules/generators mod_autoindex.c
> > Log:
> > if we autoindex, discard the request body and check for any
> > errors doin
Jim Jagielski wr0te:
>
> This looks safe to me... I'll give it a day or so for any vetos
> to pop up, but if they don't I'll committ
thanks Jim.
Stipe
-- Hope to see you at my presentations:
"Virtual Server solution for Linux using FreeVSD"
at O'Reilly Open Source Convention 2002,
S
Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> At 11:12 AM +0200 5/31/02, Stipe Tolj wrote:
> >diff -ur apache-1.3/src/helpers/install.sh apache-1.3-cygwin/src/helpers/install.sh
> >--- apache-1.3/src/helpers/install.sh Tue Jun 12 10:24:53 2001
> >+++ apache-1.3-cygwin/src/helpers/install.sh Tue May 28 11:15:10 200
13 matches
Mail list logo