Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 CHANGES

> upgrade your cvs client perhaps? the only box I have that problem with > is RH 6.1 with a never-updated cvs client I was running RH9, which was cvs 1.11.2. I've just upgraded to 1.12.5, so I guess I'll see. good to know someone else has at least seen this - I've been googling and searching a

Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 CHANGES

Geoffrey Young wrote: That's fine. The only comment I have is that you should commit the change to CHANGES and the core change at the same time rather than splitting them into two separate commits. yeah, I always try to do that, but my cvs client doesn't ever seem to pick up on the Changes file

Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 CHANGES

> That's fine. The only comment I have is that you should commit the > change to CHANGES and the core change at the same time rather than > splitting them into two separate commits. yeah, I always try to do that, but my cvs client doesn't ever seem to pick up on the Changes file (for any of my r

Re: new core module mod_version

Geoffrey Young wrote: Well, thank you both. If there come no objections, I'll commit it these days into modules/metadata. actually, while I still like the idea, does it make sense to broaden the scope of the module a bit? I had started a discussion on , which turned into more of an idea could pi

Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 CHANGES

--On Friday, January 30, 2004 2:48 PM -0500 Geoffrey Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: hi all... hopefully I followed protocol here correctly wrt 2.1, but someone please feel free to set me straight if I didn't. I also closed the PR. That's fine. The only comment I have is that you should commit

Re: mod_ldap/util_ldap Issues...

>Since you mention it, though, Brad, is non-anonymous bind heavily used >in NetWare? As noted in my previous message, there are open reports of I couldn't tell how heavily it is used since our default install uses an anonymous bind. But I do know that there are a lot of NetWare administrators

Re: mod_ldap/util_ldap Issues...

Brad Nicholes wrote: There is a patch that was committed to CVS HEAD that is waiting for enough votes to be backported to the 2.0 branch. The patch addresses PR #18756 that deals with shared memory issues and could very possibly fix the problems that you are seeing. The crash on Solaris is with

Re: mod_ldap/util_ldap Issues...

There is a patch that was committed to CVS HEAD that is waiting for enough votes to be backported to the 2.0 branch. The patch addresses PR #18756 that deals with shared memory issues and could very possibly fix the problems that you are seeing. The patch has been sitting in the backport queue

Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 CHANGES

hi all... hopefully I followed protocol here correctly wrt 2.1, but someone please feel free to set me straight if I didn't. I also closed the PR. --Geoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > geoff 2004/01/30 11:43:39 > > Modified:.CHANGES > Log: > Keep focus of ITERATE and ITERA

mod_ldap/util_ldap Issues...

I've been struggling with mod_ldap / util_ldap for some time now.  The module is basically working on Windows (and HP Apache has it working with the worker MPM on HPUX), but I've been utterly failing on Solaris (8). There are a good number of open bugs on this module.  I updated to 2.0.48 + th

Re: new core module mod_version

On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 10:46:11AM -0500, Geoffrey Young wrote: > > > Well, thank you both. If there come no objections, I'll commit it these days > > into modules/metadata. > > actually, while I still like the idea, does it make sense to broaden the > scope of the module a bit? I had started a

Re: new core module mod_version

> Well, thank you both. If there come no objections, I'll commit it these days > into modules/metadata. actually, while I still like the idea, does it make sense to broaden the scope of the module a bit? I had started a discussion on , which turned into more of an idea could ping ap_mpm_query a

RE: Proxy hiccups with WSAEADDRINUSE

>-Original Message- >From: Jeff Trawick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >see http://www.ncftpd.com/ncftpd/doc/misc/ephemeral_ports.html#Windows Thanks! That helped fix the problem.

Re: new core module mod_version

* Justin Erenkrantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --On Wednesday, January 28, 2004 1:15 AM +0100 André Malo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > I've uploaded the module here: > > . The are some more detailed > > descriptions at the beginning of the file aft