Please review and commit the following patch.
Thanks,
Mohan
-Original Message-
From: GUMMALAM,MOHAN (HP-Cupertino,ex2) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 3:26 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: [PATCH]: 64-bit porting issue in apr_sdbm.h
There is a 64
In Apache1.3 I remember seeing support for SOCKS in mod_proxy. I do not see
any such support in Apache2.0. I have looked through the email archives,
and have not come across any email thread yet which contains a discussion on
it. So, was it a conscious decision to not have Socks support in Apac
ECTED]'
Subject: RE: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 STATUS
On Sun, 7 Apr 2002, GUMMALAM,MOHAN (HP-Cupertino,ex2) wrote:
> So does it mean that you (as in apache.org) have access to a 11i version
> 1.5 (IA64) box? If so, thats good news. Otherwise, I could arrange an
> access to an IPF box fo
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2002 11:09 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 STATUS
On Sun, 7 Apr 2002, GUMMALAM,MOHAN (HP-Cupertino,ex2) wrote:
> I do not see HP-UX in the list. So, has anyone signed up for releasing
> Apache binaries on HP-UX
I do not see HP-UX in the list. So, has anyone signed up for releasing
Apache binaries on HP-UX already? If not, I would like to sign up for
building apache on HP-UX 11.00 (PA-RISC) and HP-UX 11i version 1.5
(IA64/IPF).
Thanks,
Mohan
-Original Message-
From: Aaron Bannert [mailto:[EMAIL
There is a 64-bit issue with the apr_dbm.h sources -- this results in a
WeDAV failure on 64-bit HP-UX. We ran into the problem while trying to
support it on IA64. The problem is in the CONVERT_DATUM macro, which
coverts a apr_datum_t* to apr_sdbm_datum_t*, through casting. I am sending
a patch
Currently suexec does not seem to work with apache2.0.. well atleast not
completely. The problem I seem to run into is with ~user situations. Looks
like the suexec code (suexec.c) expects to make a distinction between ~user
calls from others by inspecting for the "~" character. However, in
os/u
