On Mon, 20 Sep 2004, Joe Schaefer wrote:
> Pretty much all the @warning sections that begin with
> "This doesn't work...", i.e.
>
> /**
> * Insert the element nep into the ring before element lep
> * (..lep.. becomes ..nep..lep..)
> * @warning This doesn't work for inserting before the first
Even though it isn't a big deal, the point is that newcurl is not
undefined. It was initialized to NULL when it was declared at the
beginning of the function. This is a mismatch between HEAD and
APACHE_2_0_BRANCH. util_ldap has been moved out of experimental in HEAD
and now exists in modules/
Cliff Woolley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 20 Sep 2004, Joe Schaefer wrote:
>
> > Thanks, Cliff. I guess I was getting confused by the
> > warnings in the apr_ring.h docs.
>
> If you can be more specific about what part confused you, I'd be happy to
> rewrite said docs. If they're con
On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 12:18:48 -0400, Geoffrey Young
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > trawick 2004/09/18 09:18:27
> >
> > Modified:.CHANGES
> >modules/mappers mod_rewrite.c
> > Log:
> > mod_rewrite: Handle per-location rules when r-
On Mon, 20 Sep 2004, Joe Schaefer wrote:
> Thanks, Cliff. I guess I was getting confused by the
> warnings in the apr_ring.h docs.
If you can be more specific about what part confused you, I'd be happy to
rewrite said docs. If they're confusing as they stand, it's probably my
fault anyway. :)
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
At 01:33 PM 9/20/2004, Jess Holle wrote:
Brad Nicholes wrote:
I'm still wondering if we shouldn't just stick with the local
read/write
lock on Windows and other single child MPMs (NetWare?) as this should
allow better throughpu
Even after all my patches, I still get a bus error and core dump on the
first LDAP authentication request on Solaris 8 with worker MPM and an
active shared memory LDAP cache. [This is with iPlanet LDAP SDK 5.08,
though I doubt that matters.]
I've run out of time to look into this further. Mor
At 01:33 PM 9/20/2004, Jess Holle wrote:
>Brad Nicholes wrote:
>>>
>>>I'm still wondering if we shouldn't just stick with the local
>>>read/write
>>>lock on Windows and other single child MPMs (NetWare?) as this should
>>>allow better throughput in such cases and yet be safe, right? In
>>>fact,
Cliff Woolley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> Zuh? This is completely unnecessary. The only time inserting can corrupt
> a brigade is if the bucket being inserted is still on some other brigade
Thanks, Cliff. I guess I was getting confused by the
warnings in the apr_ring.h docs. The cor
Brad Nicholes wrote:
I'm still wondering if we shouldn't just stick with the local
read/write
lock on Windows and other single child MPMs (NetWare?) as this should
allow better throughput in such cases and yet be safe, right? In
fact,
Actually on NetWar
>I'm still wondering if we shouldn't just stick with the local
read/write
>lock on Windows and other single child MPMs (NetWare?) as this should
>allow better throughput in such cases and yet be safe, right? In
fact,
Actually on NetWare this is a non-issue. On NetWare everything is
global (me
On Mon, 20 Sep 2004, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> (ie, you're inserting it onto brigade b before removing it from brigade a).
PS: I should mention that in this case, it's brigade a that will be
corrupt, not brigade b, since the inserted bucket's prev and next pointers
will simply be overwritten. Briga
On Sun, 19 Sep 2004, Joe Schaefer wrote:
> Index: modules/loggers/mod_logio.c
> ===
> RCS file: /home/cvspublic/httpd-2.0/modules/loggers/mod_logio.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.8
> diff -u -r1.8 mod_logio.c
> --- modules/loggers/mod_lo
Joe Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> With mod_logio enabled on a 404 response, the final
> output brigade sent down the filter stack consists of
> a single EOS bucket. In this circumstance mod_logio's
> logio_out_filter() calls APR_BUCKET_INSERT_BEFORE on
> the sole eos bucket, which cor
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> trawick 2004/09/18 09:18:27
>
> Modified:.CHANGES
>modules/mappers mod_rewrite.c
> Log:
> mod_rewrite: Handle per-location rules when r->filename is unset.
> Previously this would segfault or simply not match as expected,
> dep
Garrett Rooney wrote:
> Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>
>> --On Friday, September 17, 2004 1:07 PM -0400 Garrett Rooney
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> Could someone please take a look at bug 31228 in bugzilla?
>>>
>>> It's just adding a new response code (226) which is defined in rfc3229.
>>>
>
See my util_ldap.c patch.
Whether or not this patch is absolutely necessary, leaving code paths
that leave function return results undefined is never good!
Also, see the bigger patch to util_ldap_cache_mgr.c that I passed along
yesterday.
I've attached both here for convenience.
--
Jess Hol
On Sun, Sep 19, 2004 at 11:00:25PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> --- util_ldap_cache_mgr.c 13 Sep 2004 11:11:32 - 1.8
> +++ util_ldap_cache_mgr.c 19 Sep 2004 23:00:25 - 1.9
...
> @@ -252,6 +254,8 @@
>newcurl = util_ald_cache_insert(st->util_ldap_cache, &c
18 matches
Mail list logo
