On 5/12/05, Joe Schaefer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Without this patch, the new apr_pool_join stuff in apr's trunk
segfaults all over the place.
Why? Is worker MPM doing something wrong (creating standalone pool in
that manner), or does APR need some help?
Index: server/mpm/worker/worker.c
Brian Akins wrote:
Paul Querna wrote:
CacheEnable disk /
Maybe have it as an option to CacheEnable instead?
CacheEnable disk /special_stuff normal
CacheEnable disk / quick
with quick being the default. That way, you would not have to do it
globally, but could be more specific.
Jeff Trawick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 5/12/05, Joe Schaefer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Without this patch, the new apr_pool_join stuff in apr's trunk
segfaults all over the place.
Why? Is worker MPM doing something wrong (creating standalone pool in
that manner), or does APR need some
At 04:55 AM 5/13/2005, Paul Querna wrote:
Brian Akins wrote:
Paul Querna wrote:
CacheEnable disk /
Maybe have it as an option to CacheEnable instead?
CacheEnable disk /special_stuff normal
CacheEnable disk / quick
Unless I totally missed the point, any mistake in either mod_cache,
or
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
At 04:55 AM 5/13/2005, Paul Querna wrote:
Brian Akins wrote:
Paul Querna wrote:
CacheEnable disk /
Maybe have it as an option to CacheEnable instead?
CacheEnable disk /special_stuff normal
CacheEnable disk / quick
Unless I totally missed the point, any
At 11:35 AM 5/13/2005, Paul Querna wrote:
Uhm, in my specific case yes, I needed it to get around not setting
'Vary: User-Agent'. This is not the only use. Please don't -1 it based
on my example of how I abused it in real life.
Please clarify how not setting that Vary header does not produce
Andr Malo wrote:
I'm seeing it like this:
Once forked off, 2.1.x would be *stabilizing* branch, that finally leads
to a 2.2.x branch, when we feel, it's stable (svn mv 2.1.x 2.2.x?). From the
2.1.x branch we tag alpha and beta releases; from *stable* 2.2.x rc and
stable release. I think that's
Sander Striker wrote:
Andr Malo wrote:
I'm seeing it like this:
Once forked off, 2.1.x would be *stabilizing* branch, that finally leads
to a 2.2.x branch, when we feel, it's stable (svn mv 2.1.x 2.2.x?).
From the 2.1.x branch we tag alpha and beta releases; from *stable*
2.2.x rc and
