> Am 17.04.2018 um 19:18 schrieb William A Rowe Jr :
>
>> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 11:28 AM, Graham Leggett wrote:
>>
>> The distributions have been doing this nigh on two decades - the stability
>> of a given software baseline which will not suddenly break at 3am some
>> arbitrary Sunday in
On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 8:37 AM, Steffen wrote:
>
> I like to continue building/testing trunk.
>
> Is there a fix coming ?
I guess not from the author. Try r1829381 now committed to trunk. If
that doesn't work, we'll revert and start again, no cycles to check
the fix myself.
On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 11:28 AM, Graham Leggett wrote:
>
> The distributions have been doing this nigh on two decades - the stability of
> a given software baseline which will not suddenly break at 3am some arbitrary
> Sunday in the middle of the holidays is the very product they’re selling.
>
> No
> distribution (that I am aware of) ships something called Apache httpd v2.4.29.
At LFS (linux from scratch), we're the exception confirming the rule of
shipping v2.4.29 with the
single patch of defining a preferred layout (the BLFS layout patch) in LFS/BLFS
v8.2.
B/LFS-svn is shipping wi
FWIW, I am seeing this too, but examining the code I could not see how. It
looks like it just does a shm destroy and then moves on to recreating the SHM
segment.
> On 17 Apr 2018, at 14:03, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> This should not be a fatal error... I don't think it was before.
>
>> Begin fo
On 17 Apr 2018, at 5:40 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
>> I’m not following the “all in vain”.
>>
>> This patch in v2.4.33 was dine specifically to fix an issue in Xenial, and
>> Ubuntu is on the case:
>>
>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apache2/+bug/1750356
>
> Then Ubuntu is distr
On 17 Apr 2018, at 6:08 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
> No enhancement since 2011-12-19 has been presented for the collective
> community's scrutiny.
Again, I’m not following.
The architecture of v2.4 has been very stable, the need for breaking changes
has been largely non existent, and the foc
On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 10:50 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
>
> No enhancement since 2011-12-19 has been subjected to any community
> scrutiny. This was the date 2.3.16-beta for 2.4 was announced.
Sorry that statement is somewhat unfair...
* Anyone is welcome to "be a developer" and check out tru
On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 9:47 AM, Graham Leggett wrote:
> On 17 Apr 2018, at 4:41 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
>
>> We observe the "code freeze" effect (defined by three different
>> distributors) coupled with distributors deep distrust of our releases,
>> so by continuously polluting our version
> If a distributor shipped a source package of something called Apache
> httpd 2.4.29, which is obviously not .29 but .29+{stuff}, what would
> be our reaction?
The package name/filename/etc or the compiled-in server version?
For the former, it's already differentiated on most distros I've seen.
F
On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 9:47 AM, Graham Leggett wrote:
> On 17 Apr 2018, at 4:41 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
>
>> And everything contributed to 2.4.33 release? All in vain. None of
>> that in this OS distribution, because, code freeze.
>
> I’m not following the “all in vain”.
>
> This patch in v
On 15 Apr 2018, at 3:25 AM, Yehuda Katz wrote:
> That also assumes the OS distributions pick up the point releases. RedHat
> certainly doesn't pick up the new features, only bug fixes.
By design - that is what “Redhat Enterprise Linux” is.
Regards,
Graham
—
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cry
On 17 Apr 2018, at 4:41 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
> And everything contributed to 2.4.33 release? All in vain. None of
> that in this OS distribution, because, code freeze.
I’m not following the “all in vain”.
This patch in v2.4.33 was dine specifically to fix an issue in Xenial, and
Ubuntu
2018-04-09 22:38 GMT+02:00 Luca Toscano :
> Hi everybody,
>
> 2018-04-05 7:59 GMT+02:00 :
>
>> https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61860
>>
>> --- Comment #4 from Luca Toscano ---
>> Ok now I think I know what's happening (and I got what Eric was trying to
>> suggest). One of the thing
On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 8:48 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> IMO, the below ignores the impacts on OS distributors who
> provide httpd. We have seen how long it takes for them
> to go from 2.2 to 2.4...
They went to 2.4 once 2.4 was no longer beta. There is this concept
called "code freeze". At that p
This should not be a fatal error... I don't think it was before.
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: bugzi...@apache.org
> Subject: [Bug 62308] New: Apache crashes after graceful restart with AH02599:
> slotmem (failed size check)
> Date: April 17, 2018 at 6:21:09 AM EDT
> To: b...@httpd.apache
Hello
mod_dav_fs is a nice solution to provide file sharing, but I have found
the management of stale mod_dav_fs locks a pain to handle. If an
application crashes holding a lock, one have to await for lock timeout
before touchign the file again.
Perhaps there is a smart solution to this, but si
17 matches
Mail list logo
