On 5/31/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: covener
Date: Thu May 31 18:38:49 2007
New Revision: 543351
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=543351
Log:
add myself to contributor list
Modified:
httpd/site/trunk/docs/contributors/index.html
You need to modify
What was the goal to derivate from mod_ssl ?
Is NSS better than OpenSSL ? If so, why not implementing everything from
mod_ssl with NSS and stick to it ?
Was the goal to provide new features, like OCSP ? If so, why not
implement them in mod_ssl ?
(Btw, a patch to add OCSP is waiting for approval
Dear customer,
Thank you for your message. Due to the extraordinarily large number of
e-mails that we are currently receiving, it might take us up to several
days to reply to your request. We thank you for your patience and understanding,
and will get back to you as soon as possible.
With kind
For 1.3, I'm looking at something like this...
Similar approach for 2.x...
Comments and feedback appreciated before I work on
porting to the 2.x trees:
Index: main/http_main.c
===
--- main/http_main.c(revision 543486)
+++
On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 10:05:26AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
- if (ap_scoreboard_image-servers[n].status != SERVER_DEAD
- kill((pid = ap_scoreboard_image-parent[n].pid), 0) == -1) {
- ap_update_child_status(n, SERVER_DEAD, NULL);
- /* just mark it as having a
On Jun 1, 2007, at 10:19 AM, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 10:05:26AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
- if (ap_scoreboard_image-servers[n].status != SERVER_DEAD
- kill((pid = ap_scoreboard_image-parent[n].pid), 0) == -1) {
-
Is there a function in the APR or elsewhere that performs URL
encoding/decoding (aka percent-encoding)? I've searched all over for
one but haven't found anything. mod_security has these functions but
it doesn't export them for some reason.
On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 10:50:09AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Should we get rid of it from the table here? Can we get away without
removing stale pids in general? What if they are recycled by the OS
for something else?
No, that's a good point. We should likely remove the
pid from our
On Jun 1, 2007, at 7:53 AM, Frank Jones wrote:
Is there a function in the APR or elsewhere that performs URL
encoding/decoding (aka percent-encoding)? I've searched all over for
one but haven't found anything. mod_security has these functions but
it doesn't export them for some reason.
It
On 6/1/07, Tim Bray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 1, 2007, at 7:53 AM, Frank Jones wrote:
Is there a function in the APR or elsewhere that performs URL
encoding/decoding (aka percent-encoding)? I've searched all over for
one but haven't found anything. mod_security has these functions but
On Jun 1, 2007, at 10:45 AM, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 10:50:09AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Should we get rid of it from the table here? Can we get away without
removing stale pids in general? What if they are recycled by the OS
for something else?
No, that's a
The Apache apreq libraries have that stuff:
include/apreq2/apreq_util.h:APREQ_DECLARE(apr_size_t) apreq_encode(char *dest...
include/apreq2/apreq_util.h:APREQ_DECLARE(apr_status_t)
apreq_decode(char *dest...
The apreq tools are pretty useful.
On 6/1/07, Frank Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 1, 2007, at 11:39 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
I will likely just commit the updated patch, and we
can fine-tune via commits rather than having rounds
of patches posted :)
I just started on the trunk patches, not sure when they
will be done... anyway, I was think that in addition to
the
Marc Stern wrote:
What was the goal to derivate from mod_ssl ?
The goal was to make an Apache SSL module using NSS as the crypto
engine. I saw no point in re-inventing the wheel so used mod_ssl as a
starting point.
Is NSS better than OpenSSL ?
Both serve their purposes, choice is good.
On Jun 1, 2007, at 3:35 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
FWIW, I've created a branch of the work in progress, so
people can follow along and provide comments and patches :)
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/httpd-pid-
table
this is based off of trunk, so once we have this
On 06/01/2007 05:50 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: covener
Date: Fri Jun 1 08:50:12 2007
New Revision: 543515
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=543515
Log:
SECURITY: CVE-2007-1862 (cve.mitre.org)
mod_mem_cache: Copy headers into longer lived storage; header names and
On 06/01/2007 10:55 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 06/01/2007 05:50 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+
static apr_status_t recall_headers(cache_handle_t *h, request_rec *r)
{
mem_cache_object_t *mobj = (mem_cache_object_t*) h-cache_obj-vobj;
-h-req_hdrs = apr_table_copy(r-pool,
On 6/1/07, Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ahh. Should have read http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41551#c2
before which answers my question :-).
Anyway another question: From a first glance your original patch and
this patch basicly seem to do the same thing.
But the
On 06/01/2007 05:42 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: jim
Date: Fri Jun 1 08:42:57 2007
New Revision: 543511
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=543511
Log:
Add in parent process PID table, to provide for
a check against the pid values located in the
scoreboard.
On 06/01/2007 11:18 PM, Eric Covener wrote:
On 6/1/07, Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ahh. Should have read
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41551#c2
before which answers my question :-).
Anyway another question: From a first glance your original patch and
this
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 06/01/2007 11:18 PM, Eric Covener wrote:
On 6/1/07, Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ahh. Should have read
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41551#c2
before which answers my question :-).
Anyway another question: From a first glance your
On 06/01/2007 09:28 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: jim
Date: Fri Jun 1 12:28:31 2007
New Revision: 543583
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=543583
Log:
Create work-in-progress branch
Modified:
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
For my understanding (and a bit of devils advocate here :-)): Why do we use a
table here and not a fixed size array (HARD_SERVER_LIMIT) of ints (apr_array
of
pid_t in the 2.x case). If we keep the pids at the same index as in the
scoreboard the checks would be
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
For my understanding (and a bit of devils advocate here :-)): Why do we use a
table here and not a fixed size array (HARD_SERVER_LIMIT) of ints (apr_array
of
pid_t in the 2.x case). If we keep the pids at the same index as in the
scoreboard the
24 matches
Mail list logo
