Adding the declaration
AP_DECLARE(void **) ap_get_request_note(request_rec *r, apr_size_t note_num);
from the http_core.h after the headers are included silences the
warning. Weird.
Sincerely,
Joachim
We have an existing module on 1.3 which we're porting (finally) to
2.2. This is primarily a set of content handlers.
I'm seeing strange SSL behavior (all of our clients connect to this
through SSL). Specifically, under 1.3 when our module would write
data (ap_rprintf) and then return OK, the
+---+
| Bugzilla Bug ID |
| +-+
| | Status: UNC=Unconfirmed NEW=New ASS=Assigned
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 2:22 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
Jeff Trawick wrote:
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 3:53 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
How soon do we want another tarball with the whole flurry of fixes
committed to mod_fcgid already?
I'd like to see another beta
Hi,
I spoke a little too soon, there is one problem.
mod_fcgid correctly uses the VirtualHost as one of the unique inputs
for each backend daemon.
(Sidenote: This virtualhost code is *only* present in the unix process
manager, which means there is a separate bug/issue in the win32
process
On 21.09.2009 09:11, Paul Querna wrote:
While, this is obviously a terrible thing for a general purpose
module, I would like to propose that we add a 'FCGIIgnoreVirtualHost'
configuration option, which would set the vhost field to a constant
value, so FCGI processes would be shared between
The names of the configuration directives of mod_fcgid are somehow
inconsistent. At least it's abit hard to remmber, that some directives
use a prefix FCGI, others use FastCgi (and most do not have a prefix for
a namespace).
I'm not sure, how important we take configuration compatibility with the
On 09/21/2009 10:07 AM, Rainer Jung wrote:
The names of the configuration directives of mod_fcgid are somehow
inconsistent. At least it's abit hard to remmber, that some directives
use a prefix FCGI, others use FastCgi (and most do not have a prefix for
a namespace).
I'm not sure, how
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
+/* pre-scan for ldap-* requirements so we can get out of the way early
*/
+for(x=0; x reqs_arr-nelts; x++) {
Why do we know that reqs_arr != NULL always?
Wasn't that the FIXME comment that was included in the previous version
of this patch?
+if (!
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 4:18 AM, Ruediger Pluem rpl...@apache.org wrote:
On 09/21/2009 10:07 AM, Rainer Jung wrote:
The names of the configuration directives of mod_fcgid are somehow
inconsistent. At least it's abit hard to remmber, that some directives
use a prefix FCGI, others use
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 6:54 AM, Graham Leggett minf...@sharp.fm wrote:
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
+/* pre-scan for ldap-* requirements so we can get out of the way
early */
+for(x=0; x reqs_arr-nelts; x++) {
Why do we know that reqs_arr != NULL always?
Wasn't that the FIXME
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 4:01 AM, Rainer Jung rainer.j...@kippdata.dewrote:
On 21.09.2009 09:11, Paul Querna wrote:
While, this is obviously a terrible thing for a general purpose
module, I would like to propose that we add a 'FCGIIgnoreVirtualHost'
configuration option, which would set the
-Original Message-
From: Graham Leggett
Sent: Montag, 21. September 2009 12:54
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r817064 - in
/httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x: STATUS modules/aaa/mod_authnz_ldap.c
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
@@ -559,12 +582,6 @@
#endif
}
On Sep 21, 2009, at 04:07 , Rainer Jung wrote:
PHP_Fix_Pathinfo_Enable
While we're on the topic, what the heck is up with the underscores in
this one? Since when do we do underscores in directive names? Please
don't do this. Thanks.
--
Rich Bowen
rbo...@rcbowen.com
Yes, this answers my question. Thanks for the pointer.
Regards
Rüdiger
From: Jeff Trawick [mailto:traw...@gmail.com]
Sent: Montag, 21. September 2009 13:06
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r817064 - in
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 8:18 AM, Rich Bowen rbo...@rcbowen.com wrote:
On Sep 21, 2009, at 04:07 , Rainer Jung wrote:
PHP_Fix_Pathinfo_Enable
While we're on the topic, what the heck is up with the underscores in this
one? Since when do we do underscores in directive names? Please don't do
On 21.09.2009 09:11, Paul Querna wrote:
(Sidenote: This virtualhost code is *only* present in the unix process
manager, which means there is a separate bug/issue in the win32
process manager code)
I compared the two spawn functions and made them more consistent in
r817237 (both now using the
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 09/21/2009 10:07 AM, Rainer Jung wrote:
The names of the configuration directives of mod_fcgid are somehow
inconsistent. At least it's abit hard to remmber, that some directives
use a prefix FCGI, others use FastCgi (and most do not have a prefix
Next up is the dav providers patch. Currently there is no way for dav
modules to get access to the filename or the the request_rec. A dav
module would need to check the filename to see if needs to enable acls
or other options. A dav module would also need the request_rec for
checking
On 21.09.2009 13:03, Jeff Trawick wrote:
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 4:18 AM, Ruediger Pluem rpl...@apache.org
mailto:rpl...@apache.org wrote:
On 09/21/2009 10:07 AM, Rainer Jung wrote:
The names of the configuration directives of mod_fcgid are somehow
inconsistent. At least
-Original Message-
From: Rainer Jung
Sent: Montag, 21. September 2009 15:49
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: [mod_fcgid] Cleaning up configuration directive names
On 21.09.2009 13:03, Jeff Trawick wrote:
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 4:18 AM, Ruediger Pluem rpl...@apache.org
Brian J. France wrote:
I believe this is the first patch that will break binary compatibility
because it adds a function pointer to the middle of the struct. I
believe binary compatibility could be retained if we add the function
pointers to the end of the struct instead of in the middle.
On Sep 21, 2009, at 10:15 AM, Graham Leggett wrote:
Brian J. France wrote:
I believe this is the first patch that will break binary
compatibility
because it adds a function pointer to the middle of the struct. I
believe binary compatibility could be retained if we add the function
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 12:30 PM, Marcus Merz mm...@gmx.de wrote:
Hi Jeff,
Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:cc67648e0909191842i1053222ai176bfe1e37aee...@mail.gmail.com...
On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 3:48 AM, Marcus Merz mm...@gmx.de wrote:
Recap: Try
Brian J. France br...@brianfrance.com writes:
On Sep 21, 2009, at 10:15 AM, Graham Leggett wrote:
Brian J. France wrote:
I believe this is the first patch that will break binary
compatibility
because it adds a function pointer to the middle of the struct. I
believe binary compatibility
-Original Message-
From: Dan Poirier
Sent: Montag, 21. September 2009 17:28
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: DAV Provider Patch
Brian J. France br...@brianfrance.com writes:
On Sep 21, 2009, at 10:15 AM, Graham Leggett wrote:
Brian J. France wrote:
I believe
Rainer Jung wrote:
Any other name changes needed? I guess SharememPath - SharedMemoryPath
would also be good.
Nope; refer to other directives. shmem is the abbreviation used by digest,
but the usual convention is not identify as what it is, but what it does.
E.g. It's the SSLSessionCache,
On 21.09.2009 13:41, Jeff Trawick wrote:
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 4:01 AM, Rainer Jung rainer.j...@kippdata.de
mailto:rainer.j...@kippdata.de wrote:
On 21.09.2009 09:11, Paul Querna wrote:
While, this is obviously a terrible thing for a general purpose
module, I would like to
Rainer Jung wrote:
The names of the configuration directives of mod_fcgid are somehow
inconsistent. At least it's abit hard to remmber, that some directives
use a prefix FCGI, others use FastCgi (and most do not have a prefix for
a namespace).
I'm not sure, how important we take configuration
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 1:59 PM, rj...@apache.org wrote:
Author: rjung
Date: Mon Sep 21 17:59:23 2009
New Revision: 817350
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=817350view=rev
Log:
...
- Adding the other two compatibility notes from README to the
upgrade section
...
+
On 21.09.2009 18:51, Chris Darroch wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
The names of the configuration directives of mod_fcgid are somehow
inconsistent. At least it's abit hard to remmber, that some directives
use a prefix FCGI, others use FastCgi (and most do not have a prefix for
a namespace).
I'm
Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:cc67648e0909210827h6247d05fu65c31252b6f32...@mail.gmail.com...
What is your configuration to run modify.php as a CGI? Do you add a
shebang line, or use something else?
Here's my configuration:
LoadModule fcgid_module
As an additional note, i found another watermark script which fails with the
same error (it will need the same .htaccess as in my first post - save the
script as modify.php as well or adjust the name in .htaccess accordingly) as
PHP will try to parse the jpg file instead of displaying the
On 21.09.2009 20:11, Jeff Trawick wrote:
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 1:59 PM, rj...@apache.org
mailto:rj...@apache.org wrote:
Author: rjung
Date: Mon Sep 21 17:59:23 2009
New Revision: 817350
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=817350view=rev
On 21.09.2009 20:14, Jeff Trawick wrote:
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 1:37 PM, rj...@apache.org
mailto:rj...@apache.org wrote:
Author: rjung
Date: Mon Sep 21 17:37:42 2009
New Revision: 817338
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=817338view=rev
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Rainer Jung rainer.j...@kippdata.dewrote:
On 21.09.2009 20:14, Jeff Trawick wrote:
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 1:37 PM, rj...@apache.org
mailto:rj...@apache.org wrote:
Author: rjung
Date: Mon Sep 21 17:37:42 2009
New Revision: 817338
On 21.09.2009 17:47, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
Any other name changes needed? I guess SharememPath - SharedMemoryPath
would also be good.
Nope; refer to other directives. shmem is the abbreviation used by digest,
but the usual convention is not identify as what it is,
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Marcus Merz mm...@gmx.de wrote:
Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:cc67648e0909210827h6247d05fu65c31252b6f32...@mail.gmail.com...
What is your configuration to run modify.php as a CGI? Do you add a
shebang line, or use something
Hi Jeff,
Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:cc67648e0909211455i5cb6c7c3ub4fdcc25cb9cc...@mail.gmail.com...
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Marcus Merz mm...@gmx.de wrote:
In my php.ini i have
; cgi.force_redirect is necessary to provide security running PHP as a CGI
39 matches
Mail list logo
