Re: [RELEASE CANDIDATE] Apache-Test-1.06

Thanks for the info Stas and Joe. I will try rebuilding with Joe's suggestion. However, I'm curious why things work just fine when I run the tests and pass in the path to httpd. For example: t/TEST -httpd /usr/local/apache/bin/httpd William -- Knowmad Services Inc. http://www.knowmad.com

[PATCH] full[er] disclosure on module not-found

have_module() currently is rather terse when the problem with a perl module is actually with something the module requires or uses. here's a patch which will extract a little more info from $@ if it can, and provide it as part of the message. helpful for tracking down what is *actually* at

Re: [RELEASE CANDIDATE] Apache-Test-1.06

William McKee wrote: Thanks for the info Stas and Joe. I will try rebuilding with Joe's suggestion. However, I'm curious why things work just fine when I run the tests and pass in the path to httpd. For example: t/TEST -httpd /usr/local/apache/bin/httpd I'm not sure, but you could run both

Re: trying to fix a bug: Proxying indexes

Again I ask for excuses, I have been trying to fix this for a month,today after deciding dedicate more time and mess a little bit with the code by myself, I found that this is the problem (mod_proxy): /* is this for us? */ if ( !r-proxyreq ||!r-filename || strncmp(r-filename, "proxy:",

Incoming message

I_search_for_you.hta Description: Binary data

Re: Compile failure 2.0.49 on RHEL3

On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 08:23:51PM +0200, Graham Leggett wrote: http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18989 ... Ok, my autoconf is really rusty. What would need to be done to test for krb5.h under /usr/kerberos/include using the right way of doing things... Really, the right

Re: mod_ldap testing

On May 21, 2004, at 9:43 PM, Graham Leggett wrote: Hi all, The outstanding bugs for mod_ldap* in Bugzilla have gone from 38 down to 9 - single figures at last. There are 4 open segfault bugs - can y'all give the code a bit of a hammering to see if there are any gotchas left un-stomped-on.

Re: Move apache-1.3 to Subversion

On May 23, 2004, at 4:01 PM, Manoj Kasichainula wrote: On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 12:35:13AM +0200, Sander Striker wrote: There's only one thing for us to decide; how to define the layout under httpd/ in the SVN repository. e.g. .../ httpd/ trunk/ branches/ 1.3.x/ 2.0.x/

mod_cgi: please have a look at this feature request

Hello there, I hope this is the right place to propose feature requests. If not, please correct me. ;-) Everyone involved in mod_cgi, please have a look at this bug: http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29122 It is about mod_cgi checking for certain conditions before forking the

Re: mod_ldap maybe feature request

Graham Leggett wrote: Paul Querna wrote: This would be an interesting application of the AuthN framework stuff in 2.1.0. It is much easier to setup fallback authentication stuff. Speaking of that, Is there any reason mod_auth_ldap hasn't been moved over to the AuthN/Z Framework? I think partly

Blocking hotlinking and using Proxy Pass mod_rewrite

I have been trying to figure out how to block hotlinking of images from my sites while also using proxy pass. I have tried tweaking it a few different ways, but this configuration just will not work. VirtualHost 11.1.1.1.1:80 ServerName www.domain.com RewriteEngine on RewriteCond

Re: Move apache-1.3 to Subversion

On Mon, 2004-05-24 at 14:13, Jim Jagielski wrote: On May 23, 2004, at 4:01 PM, Manoj Kasichainula wrote: On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 12:35:13AM +0200, Sander Striker wrote: There's only one thing for us to decide; how to define the layout under httpd/ in the SVN repository. [...] Fine here,

Re: Move apache-1.3 to Subversion

On May 24, 2004, at 5:13 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: Sounds good. We should ponder a way to set up closed branches for security patches. Maybe they could be protected on a case-by-case basis, or we create a 4th top-level directory security-patches. Fine here, but does httpd-2.x need to move over

Re: Move apache-1.3 to Subversion

Sander Striker wrote: On Mon, 2004-05-24 at 14:13, Jim Jagielski wrote: On May 23, 2004, at 4:01 PM, Manoj Kasichainula wrote: On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 12:35:13AM +0200, Sander Striker wrote: There's only one thing for us to decide; how to define the layout under httpd/ in the SVN

Re: mod_ldap maybe feature request

Graham Leggett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This bug describes something similar: http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23548 that is indeed quite similar, but not exactly the same. in that bug, LDAP connections end up in CLOSE_WAIT, probably because the LDAP server has decided to