That was odd.
Consistent with the new literal characters in place of 's which was
discussed and accepted on list. Imagine nobody had performed the
`build.sh all` step in a little while.
Rev change was correct, so that's a positive. Will be testing shortly,
but optimistic. Thanks for RM'ing!
On
Hi, all;
Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release this
candidate tarball as 2.4.35:
[ ] +1: It's not just good, it's good enough!
[ ] +0: Let's have a talk.
[ ] -1:
So we kind of left this hanging...
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 2:35 PM Gregg Smith wrote:
> On 6/15/2016 9:20 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
> > In building httpd.exe, some users don't build and install openssl. It
> isn't
> > going
> > to be possible to simply #include without some
> > conditional
On 9/17/2018 2:20 PM, Rainer Jung wrote:
> Am 17.09.2018 um 20:59 schrieb Daniel Ruggeri:
>> Hi, all;
>> I have been delayed executing the automation because the test
>> suite seems to be hanging for me. This appears to be consistently
>> during t/ssl/varlookup.t as that is the only process
On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 2:56 AM Stefan Eissing
wrote:
>
> mod_ssl/ssl_engine.kernel.c, 353: logs ERR (APLOGNO(02033)) when
strict_sni_vhost_check is enabled and a request comes in without SNI.
>
> Question: is a downgrade from ERR to INFO/DEBUG backportable or do we
consider this a break of
Am 17.09.2018 um 20:59 schrieb Daniel Ruggeri:
Hi, all;
I have been delayed executing the automation because the test suite
seems to be hanging for me. This appears to be consistently during
t/ssl/varlookup.t as that is the only process other than httpd running
in this container during
Hi, all;
I have been delayed executing the automation because the test suite
seems to be hanging for me. This appears to be consistently during
t/ssl/varlookup.t as that is the only process other than httpd running
in this container during the hang. When killing httpd, the failures
On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 5:52 PM Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> Would like to also propose for apr-1.7...
How about 128bit? :p
There are __int128 (gcc) and _m128 (MSVC) and most 64bit intel/amd
CPUs support cmpxchg16b.
Intrinsics work on gcc, and (eg.) _InterlockedCompareExchange128 on Windows.
This
On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 12:08 PM William A Rowe Jr
wrote:
> I'm similarly examining the win32 cmake build in anticipation.
>
> Thus far, the only issue is the mis-inclusion of applink.c; this is broken
> with openssl 1.1.1. Looking now for a resolution.
>
There is an issue, but it seems
I'm similarly examining the win32 cmake build in anticipation.
Thus far, the only issue is the mis-inclusion of applink.c; this is broken
with openssl 1.1.1. Looking now for a resolution.
On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 10:02 AM Daniel Ruggeri
wrote:
> Hi, all;
>
> STATUS is looking clean and my test
On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 10:52 AM Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Would like to also propose for apr-1.7...
>
> *Subject: **svn commit: r1841078 - in /apr/apr/trunk: CHANGES apr.dsp
> atomic/unix/builtins64.c atomic/unix/mutex64.c atomic/win32/apr_atomic64.c
> include/apr_atomic.h
Would like to also propose for apr-1.7...
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: j...@apache.org
> Subject: svn commit: r1841078 - in /apr/apr/trunk: CHANGES apr.dsp
> atomic/unix/builtins64.c atomic/unix/mutex64.c atomic/win32/apr_atomic64.c
> include/apr_atomic.h
It is entirely appropriate to turn down the volume. That's what
module-by-module loglevels are there for.
On Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 02:56 Stefan Eissing
wrote:
> Just a quick question, if we can reach consensus here:
>
> mod_ssl/ssl_engine.kernel.c, 353: logs ERR (APLOGNO(02033)) when
>
Hi, all;
STATUS is looking clean and my test suite is building/testing. Assuming
those tests work out and life is happy, I will T 2.4.35 from 2.4.x
branch in a few hours.
I will also follow up in another couple weeks to T 2.4.36 if we can
work in some of the newer features by then.
--
The reason, is that if we can add that to apr-1.7, we don't need to change the
struct in httpd ;)
> On Sep 17, 2018, at 10:11 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> Well, we do check all this via configure... if the platforms supports 64
> "native" atomics then we could use those; if not, we could use
FYI: Both clang and GCC support both __sync and __atomic which support 64bit
ints. We could add that functionality to APR...
> On Sep 17, 2018, at 8:57 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> In principle, I agree w/ making these counters atomic... up to now, some
> minor discrepancies from "real" has
In principle, I agree w/ making these counters atomic... up to now, some minor
discrepancies from "real" has been accepted noise, but the more sophisticated
we get, the less we can accept such potential drift.
+1 to both.
> On Sep 17, 2018, at 8:44 AM, Rainer Jung wrote:
>
> I am thinking
I am thinking about making the proxy worker busy count atomic. Currently
we use an apr_size_t in shared memory and increment/decrement simply
using the C ++/-- operators. My (somewhat outdated) experience from
mod_jk is, that this is not necessarily atomic and might lead to missing
updates,
On 17/09/2018 13:15, Michal Karm wrote:
> Ad "Mustard after the meal", exactly what has been troubling me, so I stitched
> together this little Jenkins thing :-)
>
> Cheers
> K
>
> Michal Karm Babacek
Looks like I will have some work to do - in the coming days/weeks.
signature.asc
On 09/17/2018 01:01 PM, Michael wrote:
> On 12/09/2018 22:47, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> The idea is that people actually take the time to download the tarballs,
>> build a version of httpd for their use and then perform testing on said
>> version such that they can vote on whether to release it or
On 12/09/2018 22:47, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> The idea is that people actually take the time to download the tarballs,
> build a version of httpd for their use and then perform testing on said
> version such that they can vote on whether to release it or not. That testing
> entails such
Just a quick question, if we can reach consensus here:
mod_ssl/ssl_engine.kernel.c, 353: logs ERR (APLOGNO(02033)) when
strict_sni_vhost_check is enabled and a request comes in without SNI.
Question: is a downgrade from ERR to INFO/DEBUG backportable or do we consider
this a break of
22 matches
Mail list logo
