looks like a leak to me; what do you think?
Index: modules/proxy/mod_proxy_balancer.c
===
--- modules/proxy/mod_proxy_balancer.c (revision 598305)
+++ modules/proxy/mod_proxy_balancer.c (working copy)
@@ -654,7 +654,7 @@
co
Worse than a leak; conf->pool should be const, touching it explodes the
copy-on-write semantics of the conf pool memory (which otherwise is a
single common resource). There are better pools to abuse, if unavoidable,
such as process pool.
Jeff Trawick wrote:
looks like a leak to me; what do you
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Jeff Trawick
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 27. November 2007 14:21
> An: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Betreff: memory leak in 2.2.x balancer?
>
>
> looks like a leak to me; what do you think?
>
> Index: modules/proxy/mod_proxy_balancer.c
>
On Nov 27, 2007 8:47 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> > Von: Jeff Trawick
> > Gesendet: Dienstag, 27. November 2007 14:21
> > An: dev@httpd.apache.org
> > Betreff: memory leak in 2.2.x balancer?
>
> >
> >
> > looks like a leak to me;
Jeff Trawick wrote:
> On Nov 27, 2007 8:47 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
>>> Von: Jeff Trawick
>>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 27. November 2007 14:21
>>> An: dev@httpd.apache.org
>>> Betreff: memory leak in 2.2.x balancer?
>>>
>>> looks l
With APR now out, I think we're close to releasing 1.3.40 and
2.2.7... Anyone opposed with that gameplan?
Hello folks,
I have run in to a problem and hope someone can help me out. I am using
Apache HTTP server version 2.0.61
I have written a simple test module called mod_my.c in which all I do is
printout the contents of request->parsed_uri structure which if of type
apr_uri_t.
The module works just
On 11/27/2007 04:18 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Author: rpluem
> Date: Tue Nov 27 07:18:34 2007
> New Revision: 598669
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=598669&view=rev
> Log:
> * mod_substitute is now below filters and no longer in experimental.
>
> Modified:
> httpd/httpd/trunk
On 11/27/2007 07:26 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> With APR now out, I think we're close to releasing 1.3.40 and
> 2.2.7... Anyone opposed with that gameplan?
Sounds very good for me. I think there is only one issue left that needs fixing:
The fd leaking on Windows for which Bill proposed a backpor
On Nov 27, 2007, at 8:20 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
looks like a leak to me; what do you think?
Index: modules/proxy/mod_proxy_balancer.c
===
--- modules/proxy/mod_proxy_balancer.c (revision 598305)
+++ modules/proxy/mod_proxy_balan
On Nov 27, 2007, at 10:16 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jeff Trawick wrote:
On Nov 27, 2007 8:47 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Jeff Trawick
Gesendet: Dienstag, 27. November 2007 14:21
An: dev@httpd.apache.org
Betreff: memory l
I posted the notice to doc@ 2 week ago.
Now 2.2.7 is coming so I'm posting this to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/2.0.x/docs/manual/style/version.ent
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/docs/manual/style/version.ent
version.ent must be incr
On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 16:25:54 +0200 (SAST)
"Graham Leggett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, November 26, 2007 4:18 pm, Nick Kew wrote:
>
> > mod_include has an expression parser (parse_expr at line 1125
> > in /trunk/). Many other modules implement simpler parsers for
> > a range of purposes
On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 00:31:49 +
Nick Kew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've extracted the expression parser from mod_include into an
> ap_expr.c file. It was surprisingly straightforward, and loses
> none of the functionality of mod_include[1].
Now at http://people.apache.org/~niq/ap_expr.c
W
Hi Ruediger,
> On 11/27/2007 04:18 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I think it would be good if someone with a deeper understanding of Novell
> makefiles
> could have a look at the Novell makefiles in experimental/.
> I guess they are now broken too, because of the move of mod_substitute.
yes, but t
15 matches
Mail list logo
