Hi,
The patch enables finding a child slot in the scoreboard using
find_child_by_pid.
Right now the reported number of childs is 0 which is not true, cause we
have a single child, and it is in the scoreboard image already.
It's not a big problem, but disables writing portable code among
different
APACHE 2.0 STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2002/06/28 20:16:26 $]
Release:
2.0.40 : in development.
2.0.39 : rolled June 17, 2002.
2.0.38 : rolled June 16, 2002. not released.
2.0.37 : rolled June 11, 2002. not releas
APACHE 1.3 STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2002/06/27 20:57:21 $]
Release:
1.3.27-dev: In development
1.3.26: Tagged June 18, 2002.
1.3.25: Tagged June 17, 2002. Not released.
1.3.24: Tagged Mar 21, 2002. Announced Mar 22, 20
This is an analysis of one request from ap_read_request to
ap_graceful_stop_signalled serving file out of mod_mem_cache, with a couple
of hacks (which I am working to turn into production quality patches) to
bypass ap_http_header_filter...
Before Jeff's poll-timeout patch: 58115 instructions (thi
Aaron Bannert wrote:
>
> > Can't they offer a patch for their existing user base? I'm not
> > unsympathetic, but introducing these kind of hacks seems like it would
> > make the code grow more complicated with each change in server behavior.
>
> That might work in some cases, but if they are und
This patch uses the same temp brigade to read all the lines of
an HTTP request, in order to eliminate the overhead of brigade
creation and destruction that we've seen in recent performance
profiling. The patch changes the signature of ap_rgetline_core()
and adds a new ap_get_mime_headers_core(),
http://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/patches/ has patches for every released
version of Apache 1.2.x and 1.3.x
On Wed, 3 Jul 2002, Andrew Ho wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Is there a patch for earlier versions of Apache that fix the chunked
> Transfer-Encoding security hole, but nothing else? I know OpenBSD, f
Hello,
Is there a patch for earlier versions of Apache that fix the chunked
Transfer-Encoding security hole, but nothing else? I know OpenBSD, for
example, has an Apache 1.3.24 in ports that has the chunked
Transfer-Encoding fixed. That would certainly be a good short term
solution for this guy--
On Wed, 3 Jul 2002, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
>> Not acked (by me, at least). I can feel their pain..
..
> I am sure I am not the only one with this problem, as there are several
> socket tutorials and such that incorrectly say 'HTTP-1.0'.
Now he has a case - the above is true; I've corre
> > controlled/hosting environment, it is unlikely that their
> > hosts will allow unchecked patches to be applied to the server.
>
> Also, we rather violated the principle of 'be strict in what you
> send, liberal in what you accept.' We suddenly became 'strict in
> what you accept' without war
FWIW: httpd-2.0 does not appear to perform this check...
+0 for removing the check
+1 for making it runtime
either way :)
Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> Hrm I would be prone to either removing this patch, or at least
> redoing it. As some of you may recall, I mentioned this area a little
> b
Problem:
Apache 1.3.x breaks the CGI 1.1 specification with its handling of
script-generated status codes. It appears to work in the case of status 302,
but this appearance is only maintained via an uncoditional redirect in the
cast that the "location" header is set and an OK status exists.
Hrm I would be prone to either removing this patch, or at least
redoing it. As some of you may recall, I mentioned this area a little
bit ago regarding our use and expectation of ANSI sscanf() here as
well.
However, isn't what we are doing correct? It *is* an invalid protocol
statement... I'd
>
> Aaron Bannert wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 03, 2002 at 01:19:53PM -0600, Jerry Baker wrote:
> > >
> > > Can't they offer a patch for their existing user base? I'm not
> > > unsympathetic, but introducing these kind of hacks seems like it
> > > would make the code grow more complicated with
James Cox wrote:
>
> Quick patch to bring some old docs up-to-date.
Should be sent to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list rather than the
code development list..
--
#kenP-)}
Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Golux.Com/coar/
Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/
"Mill
Aaron Bannert wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 03, 2002 at 01:19:53PM -0600, Jerry Baker wrote:
> >
> > Can't they offer a patch for their existing user base? I'm not
> > unsympathetic, but introducing these kind of hacks seems like it
> > would make the code grow more complicated with each change in
> > s
On Wed, Jul 03, 2002 at 01:19:53PM -0600, Jerry Baker wrote:
> > Same here, I'm sympathetic. I think that it might be beneficial to
> > introduce an "Enable old behavior for backward-compatibility" mode, for
> > just these occasions where we have altered the behaviour of the server
> > to be more
Aaron Bannert wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 03, 2002 at 03:15:51PM -0400, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> > I can feel their pain..
>
> Same here, I'm sympathetic. I think that it might be beneficial to
> introduce an "Enable old behavior for backward-compatibility" mode, for
> just these occasions whe
On Wed, Jul 03, 2002 at 03:15:51PM -0400, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> I can feel their pain..
Same here, I'm sympathetic. I think that it might be beneficial to
introduce an "Enable old behavior for backward-compatibility" mode, for
just these occasions where we have altered the behaviour of
Not acked (by me, at least). I can feel their pain..
Original Message
Subject: Christopher Williamson: URGENT: Bug/compatability issue in Apache 1.3.26
Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2002 12:49:26 -0600
From: Christopher Williamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED
Cliff Woolley wrote:
> You're supposed to encode a query string like so:
>
> http://myserver.com/file.html?arg1=val1&arg2=val2&arg3=val3
Sure, but we also support path info, which can be used like a query string:
http://bugs.apache.org/index.cgi/full/3708
to get some Chinese spam, and Marc's
> On Tue, 2002-07-02 at 21:09, Bill Stoddard wrote:
>
> > .ap_rgetline_coreprotocol.c3.32 6
>1.4 3428
>
> I'll try the persistent-temp-brigade approach for ap_rgetline_core()
> to see how much it helps.
>
> > .get_filter_handle util_filter.c 4
I stand corrected...
But there's no reason why the HTTP header cannot be compressed either.
This is especially critical when conserving bandwidth in an wireless
environment. 1200 byte headers are not uncommon and it a latency laden
environment every bit saved enhances the consumers experience.
> 3. What if servers start supporting compressed headers. RFC 1144
The 'header' as refered to by the rfc 1144 is not the HTTP header but the
IP/TCP header.
Or in other words Van Jacobson Compression and other ethernet, IP, TCP
level compression techniques have fundamentally nothing to do with t
Couple of thoughts...
1. What if the content is compressed.
2. What about compressed chunked encoding.
3. What if servers start supporting compressed headers. RFC 1144
Regards,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Jeff Trawick
Sent:
c-l filter thinks that a partial send is not okay if using HTTP
0.9. connection->keepalive is AP_CONN_UNKNOWN. If this were set to
AP_CONN_CLOSE, c-l filter would allow a partial send. I dunno what
else that would break.
Right now Apache is eating lots and lots of storage on a big CGI
response
26 matches
Mail list logo
