As most of you probably know FOSDEM 2016 (the biggest,
100% free open source developer conference) is right
around the corner:
https://fosdem.org/2016/
We hope to have an ASF booth and we would love to see as
many ASF projects as possible present at various tracks
(AKA Developer rooms):
htt
I've hijacked Yann's thoughts and replied on a dev@apr thread. There is
merit in httpd's deliberations but the issue is sufficiently larger than
'just us ourselves'.
1.0.8 is known problematic, 1.0.5 mod_h2 is known good. I wouldn't expect
any change there
On Nov 30, 2015 17:41, "Jan Ehrhardt" wrote:
> Jim Jagielski in gmane.comp.apache.devel (Mon, 30 Nov 2015 07:24:07 -0500):
> >I'm assuming that the brokenness also shows up on trunk,
> >right?
> >
> >Bert,
Jim Jagielski in gmane.comp.apache.devel (Mon, 30 Nov 2015 07:24:07 -0500):
>I'm assuming that the brokenness also shows up on trunk,
>right?
>
>Bert, Jan, can you check if trunk shows the same behavior?
>I would prefer not hacking away on 2.4 directly and independently.
FYI: the only differences
Jim Jagielski in gmane.comp.apache.devel (Mon, 30 Nov 2015 07:24:07 -0500):
>I'm assuming that the brokenness also shows up on trunk,
>right?
>
>Bert, Jan, can you check if trunk shows the same behavior?
>I would prefer not hacking away on 2.4 directly and independently.
I checked out revision 171
Sorry for the late, was afk this times...
Regarding the name, I'm fine with ap[r]_cstr[n]casecmp(),
ap[r]_casecmpcstr[n]() or ap[r]_cstr_*() (if we need a set of
functions in this area)..
I think we all agree that the new function(s) would help protocol
"validation" being agnostic wrt the locale,
I'm assuming that the brokenness also shows up on trunk,
right?
Bert, Jan, can you check if trunk shows the same behavior?
I would prefer not hacking away on 2.4 directly and independently.
tia!!
> On Nov 29, 2015, at 3:03 AM, Stefan Eissing
> wrote:
>
> Ok, thanks. I think I have an idea of
