On Tue, 2004-03-09 at 02:13, Sander Striker wrote:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist is where the tarballs of RC 1 reside.
Please test and provide feedback.
Forgot to mention: the tagname is STRIKER_2_0_49_PRE1.
Sander
On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 05:23:38PM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
Passes httpd-test on Solaris with the following caveats/bugs in httpd-test:
The same here for linux.
- SSL tests were failing until rm'd t/conf/ssl/ca and reran ./t/TEST -config
I didn't run into that problem (fresh checkout
* Mads Toftum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- t/modules/includes.t test 49 is failing; however, I think it's a bug
in
httpd-test. That test is calling single_space(), but that function is
corrupting the response such that it fails
The same error here.
I suppose, you're talking about the
On Mar 9, 2004, at 2:25 AM, Guenter Knauf wrote:
--- mod_alias.c.origTue Feb 10 00:16:10 2004
+++ mod_alias.c Mon Mar 08 22:06:20 2004
@@ -137,9 +137,10 @@
if ( (!p-regexp alias_matches(f, p-fake) 0)
|| (p-regexp !ap_regexec(p-regexp, f, 0, NULL,
Dear Ben and OpenSSL Team members,
Could you kindly answer the following question from one of my group
members? I very much appreciate it.
I was working on what I originally thought was a bug in our FTP client.
Your ftp site has a very long banner (due to the crypto warnings and what
all),
hi all,
apacheweek has announced a vulnerability:
http://www.apacheweek.com/features/security-20
the bugzilla problem report indicates this diff fixes the problem:
http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/httpd-2.0/modules/ssl/ssl_engine_io.c?
r1=1.117r2=1.118
recent email on the dev list includes
André Malo wrote:
* Joe Orton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 08:32:30PM +0100, André Malo wrote:
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* include/http_connection.h: Declare eoc bucket interface.
Shouldn't this be a minor MMN bump?
I dunno, I don't really see the point in bumping the
On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 04:35:37PM -0500, Ghanta, Bose wrote:
I was working on what I originally thought was a bug in our FTP client.
Your ftp site has a very long banner (due to the crypto warnings and what
all), and the bug opened against our FTP client was that it would disconnect
partly
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 07:38:48AM +0100, André Malo wrote:
* Joe Orton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 08:32:30PM +0100, André Malo wrote:
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* include/http_connection.h: Declare eoc bucket interface.
Shouldn't this be a minor MMN
On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 02:47:10PM -0800, Andy Cutright wrote:
apacheweek has announced a vulnerability:
http://www.apacheweek.com/features/security-20
the bugzilla problem report indicates this diff fixes the problem:
Hi,
I wrote a module for apache 1.3 (I called it mod_cpu), which measures cpu time
consumed on each request, and logs to error_log user, system and user+system times if
any of them is greater than configured value.
If a request involved forking and executing an external program, mod_cpu does
thanks,
andy
-Original Message-
From: Joe Orton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 6:14 AM
To: Andy Cutright
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: mod_ssl fix for PR# 27106
On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 02:47:10PM -0800, Andy Cutright wrote:
apacheweek has
There are a few open patches floating about, but in general I think
we're close to a point where we should seriously consider 1.3.30.
I volunteer to be RM... I'd like to shoot for mid-late next
week for a release.
Comments?
--
===
Hi,
There are 2.0.49-rc1 tarballs available for testing at:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
Please report your results to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks in advance,
Sander
Jim Jagielski wrote:
There are a few open patches floating about, but in general I think
we're close to a point where we should seriously consider 1.3.30.
I volunteer to be RM... I'd like to shoot for mid-late next
week for a release.
Comments?
I just added a simple thing to STATUS that
On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 11:59:44AM -0800, Mathihalli, Madhusudan wrote:
I've been using the sslswamp tool (which btw is great) to stress
apache - and once in a while, I keep getting a 'abortive close'
with the following message in the error_log. Any ideas why this
is
On Tue, 9 Mar 2004, Jim Jagielski wrote:
There are a few open patches floating about,
but in general I think
we're close to a point where we should seriously consider
-Original Message-
From: Joe Orton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[SNIP]
On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 11:59:44AM -0800, Mathihalli, Madhusudan wrote:
I've been using the sslswamp tool (which btw is great) to stress
apache - and once in a while, I keep getting a 'abortive close'
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 06:14:00PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
madhum 2004/03/09 10:14:00
Modified:.Tag: APACHE_2_0_BRANCH STATUS
Log:
Propose a backport (for mod_rewrite to recognize SSL variables)
Thanks for committing that Madhu. The mod_ssl.h-ssl_private.h
Yep - I was actually in a dual-mind to propose it as a backport (since it's based on
the new mod_ssl.h).
I'll just remove the proposal for now (and let the fix come in as part of Bill Rowe's
proposal to backport entire mod_ssl 2.1 to mod_ssl 2.0)
Thanks,
-Madhu
-Original Message-
+1 Netware
Brad
Brad Nicholes
Senior Software Engineer
Novell, Inc., the leading provider of Net business solutions
http://www.novell.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tuesday, March 09, 2004 10:02:03 AM
Hi,
There are 2.0.49-rc1 tarballs available for testing at:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
* Sander Striker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are 2.0.49-rc1 tarballs available for testing at:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
Please report your results to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please include the recent docs changes (sorry for being so late).
Thanks, nd
-Original Message-
From: Joe Orton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[SNIP]
On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 11:59:44AM -0800, Mathihalli, Madhusudan wrote:
I've been using the sslswamp tool (which btw is great) to stress
apache - and once in a while, I keep getting a 'abortive close'
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 06:02:03PM +0100, Sander Striker wrote:
There are 2.0.49-rc1 tarballs available for testing...
+1
Looks good over here (though I had trouble running the testsuite on x86_64).
FWIW, x86_64/Linux on my 1.2Ghz Opteron with NPTL enabled runs worker
about 40% faster than
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 05:07:52PM -0800, Aaron Bannert wrote:
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 06:02:03PM +0100, Sander Striker wrote:
There are 2.0.49-rc1 tarballs available for testing...
+1
Looks good over here (though I had trouble running the testsuite on x86_64).
There was an httpd-test
25 matches
Mail list logo
