[STATUS] (httpd-test: perl-framework) Wed Oct 19 23:54:42 2005

httpd-test/perl-framework STATUS: -*-text-*- Last modified at [$Date: 2004-11-24 19:36:41 -0500 (Wed, 24 Nov 2004) $] Stuff to do: * finish the t/TEST exit code issue (ORed with 0x2C if framework failed) * change existing tests that frob the DocumentRoo

[STATUS] (httpd-test: flood) Wed Oct 19 23:53:28 2005

flood STATUS: -*-text-*- Last modified at [$Date: 2004-11-24 19:36:41 -0500 (Wed, 24 Nov 2004) $] Release: 1.0: Released July 23, 2002 milestone-03: Tagged January 16, 2002 ASF-transfer: Released July 17, 2001 milestone

[STATUS] (httpd-2.1) Wed Oct 19 23:50:54 2005

APACHE 2.1 STATUS: -*-text-*- Last modified at [$Date: 2005-10-16 14:05:27 -0400 (Sun, 16 Oct 2005) $] The current version of this file can be found at: * http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/STATUS Documentation status is maintained se

[STATUS] (httpd-2.0) Wed Oct 19 23:48:45 2005

APACHE 2.0 STATUS: -*-text-*- Last modified at [$Date: 2005-10-18 12:15:40 -0400 (Tue, 18 Oct 2005) $] The current version of this file can be found at: * http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/2.0.x/STATUS Documentation status is main

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 37175] New: - machine.config parse error when mounting at "/" and calling webservice

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

Re: glue between apache and python logging

Nic Ferrier wrote: All that I asked is that a module similar to mine be included in mod_python's dist so that it can be available to programmers by default. Yes, I understand this. I just think if the decision was made to include this feature it should be rock solid. I've not used the python l

Re: [PATCH] PR37145: data loss with httpd-2.0.55 reverse proxy method=post

On 10/19/2005 10:44 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: [..cut..] > > The problem is -not- in creating the transient buckets (if they are > sent, that's > goodness). The problem is in transforming them to persistant buckets > before the > core, ssl, or other filters who have set-aside operations

Re: [PATCH] PR37145: data loss with httpd-2.0.55 reverse proxy method=post

Ruediger Pluem wrote: On 10/19/2005 08:25 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: [..cut..] Ruediger - I'm questioning if it's the BRIGADE_CONCAT, or actually if we are failing to respect transient buckets in the core / ssl filters. If we are failing to pay attention to transient buckets (or not al

Re: [PATCH] PR37145: data loss with httpd-2.0.55 reverse proxy method=post

On 10/19/2005 08:25 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: [..cut..] > > Ruediger - I'm questioning if it's the BRIGADE_CONCAT, or actually if we > are > failing to respect transient buckets in the core / ssl filters. If we are > failing to pay attention to transient buckets (or not allocating the >

Re: glue between apache and python logging

- good thinking about the virtual host problem... - I would not add the handler to the 'request' logger ; like Nic or Nick or Bruce said, this is not required, the 'request' logger inherits his handlers from the root logger. This would ease things a little bit. - Anyway, my point is the same as y

Re: [PATCH] PR 18757 Content-Length removed from proxied HEAD responses

Roy T. Fielding wrote: That sounds like spaghetti code to me. Fix the bug in the filters, not the side-effects. +1 on this patch as a temporary fix if you add commentary with it, but I'd rather have a server that isn't so fragile in the long term. To my knowledge filters have never had the c

Re: glue between apache and python logging

In that case, let us just apply Rule #6 to this situation. Bruce Jim Gallacher wrote: Nic Ferrier wrote: Nicolas Lehuen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: OK now this is totally weird, we've got a Nic, a Nick and a Nicolas in the thread, watch out for mass confusion ! Bah. You got the joke f

Re: glue between apache and python logging

Nic Ferrier wrote: Nicolas Lehuen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: OK now this is totally weird, we've got a Nic, a Nick and a Nicolas in the thread, watch out for mass confusion ! Bah. You got the joke first. Well, this is python, so everyone really should be called Bruce. Maybe that will

Re: [PATCH] PR 18757 Content-Length removed from proxied HEAD responses

On Oct 19, 2005, at 8:35 AM, Greg Ames wrote: let's say it is a HEAD request for a local static file. the default_handler calls ap_set_content_length which creates a C-L header. but then the body could be run through some length changing filter, such as mod_deflate or mod_include, invalidatin

Re: [PATCH] PR37145: data loss with httpd-2.0.55 reverse proxy method=post

Ruediger Pluem wrote: Meanwhile I identified 3 others positions in the proxy code path which can cause this kind of trouble. Please find the updated patches attached. Using APR_BRIGADE_CONCAT in a loop with ap_get_brigade on the same brigade seems to be troublesome :-). Ruediger - I'm questio

Re: POST subrequests

Stuart Children <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > As you've probably guessed, in our module we turn [some] subrequests > into POSTs. (We then set an appropriate CL header and add an input > filter to the subrequest which generates the request body.) I've written > a simple patch which adds a check

Re: glue between apache and python logging

Nic Ferrier wrote: >> I really think the argument about mod_python being minimal does not >> apply here. >> >> Nick said it - mod_python is glue between Python and apache - well, >> making Python logging work directly to Apache seems like important >> glue to me. Nick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

Further PR37145 like troublemaker?

/* combine the stored and the new */ APR_BRIGADE_CONCAT(ctx->in, in); in proxy_send_dir_filter of mod_proxy_ftp.c and /* combine the stored and the new */ APR_BRIGADE_CONCAT(ctx->in, in); in ap_proxy_send_dir_filter of proxy_ftp.c seem candidates for me for further PR37145 like trou

POST subrequests

Hi all Whilst testing 2.0.55 we found that some of the changes to mod_proxy has prevented one of our custom modules from working correctly. The problem is not with the main purpose of the CL/TE security fixes, but a related behaviour change that's happened along the way. Specifically, in prox

Re: [PATCH] PR 18757 Content-Length removed from proxied HEAD responses

Roy T. Fielding wrote: On Oct 18, 2005, at 3:58 PM, Greg Ames wrote: Index: server/protocol.c === --- server/protocol.c (revision 326257) +++ server/protocol.c (working copy) @@ -1302,7 +1302,13 @@ * We can only set a C-L

Re: [PATCH] PR37145: data loss with httpd-2.0.55 reverse proxy method=post

Meanwhile I identified 3 others positions in the proxy code path which can cause this kind of trouble. Please find the updated patches attached. Using APR_BRIGADE_CONCAT in a loop with ap_get_brigade on the same brigade seems to be troublesome :-). Regards Rüdiger On 10/19/2005 11:10 AM, Ruedi

Re: [PATCH] PR37145: data loss with httpd-2.0.55 reverse proxy method=post

Attached my (currently) final versions of the patches to fix PR37145 on 2.0.x (37145_2.0.x.diff) and on trunk (37145.diff). Comments / thoughts / votes are highly appreciated as I want to commit to trunk and propose it for backport in 2.0.x. Regards Rüdiger On 10/19/2005 02:46 AM, Ruediger Plu