Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.36

+1 from me (talking to myself). Test environment follows. I observe only one failure of the test suite (mentioned elsewhere) - it seems only to apply w/ OpenSSL 1.1.1 and H2. system:   kernel:     name: Linux     release: 3.16.0-4-amd64     version: #1 SMP Debian 3.16.51-3 (2017-12-13)    

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.36

FWIW, I've been running 2.4.36-dev at revision 1841586 for 19 days 35 minutes as of this writing and I've seen no problems up to this point. Granted I only get a few thousand hits a day and not millions but so far so good. Haven't had many tls/1.3 but I would assume that's to be expected for

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.36

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018, 14:53 Mark Blackman wrote: > > Does the TLSv1.3 support need to be production ready? > > TLSv1.3 is presumably an opt-in feature and as long as it doesn’t endanger > existing behaviours, I would have assumed it’s relatively safe to release > with caveats in the docs. > Of

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.36

> On 10 Oct 2018, at 21:04, Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> >> Does the TLSv1.3 support need to be production ready? >> >> TLSv1.3 is presumably an opt-in feature and as long as it doesn’t endanger >> existing behaviours, I would have assumed it’s relatively safe to release >> with caveats in

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.36

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018, 14:46 Jim Jagielski wrote: > > On Oct 10, 2018, at 3:37 PM, William A Rowe Jr > wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 10, 2018, 14:28 Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> >> On Oct 10, 2018, at 3:01 PM, William A Rowe Jr >> wrote: >> >> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 1:45 PM Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >>>

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.36

+1: o macOS 10.13.6, Xcode 10, OpenSSL 1.1.1 o CentOS 5&6, OpenSSL 1.0.2, 64bit Will try to test against CentOS7 and Ubuntu 14.04LTS tomorrow Thx for RMing! > On Oct 10, 2018, at 3:18 PM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: > > Hi, all; > Please find below the proposed release tarball and

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.36

> > Does the TLSv1.3 support need to be production ready? > > TLSv1.3 is presumably an opt-in feature and as long as it doesn’t endanger > existing behaviours, I would have assumed it’s relatively safe to release > with caveats in the docs. > Of course, once there’s more take-up of TLSv1.3,

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.36

> On 10 Oct 2018, at 20:28, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > > >> On Oct 10, 2018, at 3:01 PM, William A Rowe Jr > > wrote: >> >> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 1:45 PM Jim Jagielski > > wrote: >> I thought the whole intent for a quick 2.4.36 was for

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.36

FWIW, I am NOT proposing that. Nor would I have the right to do so. > On Oct 10, 2018, at 3:50 PM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: > > On 2018-10-10 14:01, William A Rowe Jr wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 1:45 PM Jim Jagielski wrote: >>> I thought the whole intent for a quick 2.4.36 was for TLSv1.3

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.36

On 2018-10-10 14:01, William A Rowe Jr wrote: On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 1:45 PM Jim Jagielski wrote: I thought the whole intent for a quick 2.4.36 was for TLSv1.3 support. If that's not ready for prime time, then why a release?? AIUI, it isn't that httpd isn't ready for release, or even

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.36

> On Oct 10, 2018, at 3:37 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 10, 2018, 14:28 Jim Jagielski > wrote: > > >> On Oct 10, 2018, at 3:01 PM, William A Rowe Jr > > wrote: >> >> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 1:45 PM Jim Jagielski >

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.36

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018, 09:04 Stefan Eissing wrote: > > Since each pytest module starts httpd and stops it again, the config files > can be very local to the tests being done. That makes them quite easy to > understand and startup times very short. > Sadly, that's an enormous regression from the

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.36

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018, 14:28 Jim Jagielski wrote: > > > On Oct 10, 2018, at 3:01 PM, William A Rowe Jr > wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 1:45 PM Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> I thought the whole intent for a quick 2.4.36 was for TLSv1.3 support. >> >> If that's not ready for prime time, then why

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.36

> On Oct 10, 2018, at 10:04 AM, Stefan Eissing > wrote: > I have started to convert the existing h2 testsuite in > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/test/mod_h2/trunk from shell scripts > to pytest in the github repro. I have a pytest suite for mod_md also in its > github. > > My

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.36

> On Oct 10, 2018, at 3:01 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 1:45 PM Jim Jagielski > wrote: > I thought the whole intent for a quick 2.4.36 was for TLSv1.3 support. > > If that's not ready for prime time, then why a release?? > > AIUI, it

[VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.36

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 2.4.36: [ ] +1: It's not just good, it's good enough! [ ] +0: Let's have a talk. [ ]

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.36

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 1:45 PM Jim Jagielski wrote: > I thought the whole intent for a quick 2.4.36 was for TLSv1.3 support. > > If that's not ready for prime time, then why a release?? > AIUI, it isn't that httpd isn't ready for release, or even httpd-test framework. Until all the upstream

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.36

On 2018-10-10 07:30, Joe Orton wrote: On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 03:29:49PM -0500, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: Hi, all; I ran through my usual testing routine, this time with OpenSSL 1.1.1, but found several test failures. In the past, these issues have been isolated to my environment so I just

Re: svn commit: r1843476 - /httpd/test/framework/trunk/t/ssl/ocsp.t

Huh?!? $ openssl list-standard-commands Invalid command 'list-standard-commands'; type "help" for a list. $ openssl version OpenSSL 1.1.0i-fips 14 Aug 2018 On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 12:18 PM wrote: > Author: jim > Date: Wed Oct 10 17:18:27 2018 > New Revision: 1843476 > > URL:

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.36

Just in case of tl;dr: The fix is proposed for backport, 1 vote is missing, would be nice to have in 2.4.36 Thanks, Stefan > Am 10.10.2018 um 10:47 schrieb Stefan Eissing : > > I have a report of h2 missing an EOS flag on certain conditions related to > php served resources. Trying to

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.36

> Am 10.10.2018 um 15:06 schrieb Joe Orton : > > I believe that t/modules/http2.t is dying in this: > >my $old_ref = \&{ 'AnyEvent::TLS::_get_session' }; >*{ 'AnyEvent::TLS::_get_session' } = sub($$;$$) { > > piece of magic which I don't understand but possibly needs updating for >

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.36

Thanks, Joe. Tried to get it running on my Ubuntu 18.04 LTS image, but there I cannot even get the necessary Perl modules installed via CPAN. I give up. > Am 10.10.2018 um 15:06 schrieb Joe Orton : > > On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 02:52:13PM +0200, Stefan Eissing wrote: >> I cannot get the test

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.36

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 02:52:13PM +0200, Stefan Eissing wrote: > I cannot get the test framework to properly initialise any longer (MacOS > 10.14): > > > t/TEST -clean > > t/TEST > [warning] setting ulimit to allow core files > ulimit -c unlimited; /usr/bin/perl >

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.36

On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 03:29:49PM -0500, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: > Hi, all; >I ran through my usual testing routine, this time with OpenSSL 1.1.1, but > found several test failures. In the past, these issues have been isolated to > my environment so I just wanted to drop a line to see if anyone

Re: NOTICE: Intent to T 2.4.36

I have a report of h2 missing an EOS flag on certain conditions related to php served resources. Trying to reproduce. First such report came before 2.4.35. I'd say, if I cannot progress on this today, then please go ahead and tag. Will report later. -Stefan > Am 09.10.2018 um 22:29 schrieb