--On Thursday, August 26, 2004 6:30 PM + [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
stoddard2004/08/26 11:30:42
Modified:.CHANGES
Log:
Give Brian and Justin credit for code backported into 2.0. Is this really
the only CHANGES entry in 2.1 for cache?
Yup. I didn't want to put a CHANGES entr
On 26 Aug 2004 13:03:06 -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> jorton 2004/08/26 06:03:06
>
> Modified:.CHANGES
> Log:
> Synch with 2.0 branch.
>
> Revision ChangesPath
> 1.1568+9 -1 httpd-2.0/CHANGES
>
> Index: CHANGES
> ==
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 4:53 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 CHANGES
jorton 2004/08/23 13:53:22
Modified:.CHANGES
Log:
Synch with 2.0 branch.
Revision
oogling and
searching archives for a while now :)
>
> alternative:
> cd .. and then "cvs commit httpd-2.0/CHANGES httpd-2.0/server/foo.c"
cool, I'll try that if the upgrade doesn't work. thanks.
--Geoff
anges file (for any of my repositories) when I do a multi-file
update.
upgrade your cvs client perhaps? the only box I have that problem with is RH
6.1 with a never-updated cvs client
alternative:
cd .. and then "cvs commit httpd-2.0/CHANGES httpd-2.0/server/foo.c"
> That's fine. The only comment I have is that you should commit the
> change to CHANGES and the core change at the same time rather than
> splitting them into two separate commits.
yeah, I always try to do that, but my cvs client doesn't ever seem to pick
up on the Changes file (for any of my r
--On Friday, January 30, 2004 2:48 PM -0500 Geoffrey Young
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
hi all...
hopefully I followed protocol here correctly wrt 2.1, but someone please
feel free to set me straight if I didn't.
I also closed the PR.
That's fine. The only comment I have is that you should commit
hi all...
hopefully I followed protocol here correctly wrt 2.1, but someone please
feel free to set me straight if I didn't.
I also closed the PR.
--Geoff
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> geoff 2004/01/30 11:43:39
>
> Modified:.CHANGES
> Log:
> Keep focus of ITERATE and ITERA
On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 03:37:54PM -0800, Aaron Bannert wrote:
>...
> FWIW, I've never liked this whole r-t-c thing for any branch of
> httpd, development or stable. I trust every single other committer
> on this project to commit good code and to catch when someone else
> commits something bad. Ev
On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 01:42:54PM +0100, Sander Striker wrote:
> It's a public recorded thing, so I'd say: that surely is more than
> sufficient. I was getting at the fact that phonecalls or irc sessions
> aren't logged, so there is no way to know there was approval without it
> being summarized
Wilt, Paul wrote:
Or even better:
mod_include: Options +Includes (or IncludesNoExec) wasn't set, removing
include filter.
Thanks Paul, but I've already committed and backported this wording:
"mod_include: Options +Includes (or IncludesNoExec) wasn't set, INCLUDES
filter removed"
so if anybody
On Wed, 10 Dec 2003, Sander Striker wrote:
> In any case, I think that all 2.0 patches deserve explicit eyeballing,
> no matter how trivial.
Fine...
> I agree that the whole STATUS route is totally
> overkill for trivial patches as these.
/that/ is what I meant. :-)
--JC
CTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 CHANGES
At 12:37 PM 12/9/2003, Stas Bekman wrote:
>Does this look good?
>
> ap_log_rerror(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_WARNING, 0, r,
> "mod_include: Options +Includes (or
IncludesNoExec) "
>-
On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 13:33, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> Sander Striker wrote:
> >>The process requires getting 3 +1s. Anywhere (list, irc, phonecall, STATUS) is
> >>okay.
> >
> >
> > No, recorded +1s are okay, this brings it down to list and STATUS.
> > Ofcourse to summarize on list that there was
Sander Striker wrote:
On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 12:29, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Cliff Woolley wrote:
On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Greg Stein wrote:
This is where process gets in the way of just doing the right thing.
Backport it for chrissakes.
amen.
The process requires getting 3 +1s. Anywhere (list, irc,
On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 12:29, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> Cliff Woolley wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Greg Stein wrote:
> >
> >
> >>This is where process gets in the way of just doing the right thing.
> >>Backport it for chrissakes.
> >
> >
> > amen.
>
> The process requires getting 3 +1s. Anywhere
Cliff Woolley wrote:
On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Greg Stein wrote:
This is where process gets in the way of just doing the right thing.
Backport it for chrissakes.
amen.
The process requires getting 3 +1s. Anywhere (list, irc, phonecall, STATUS) is
okay. I assume what you meant was that you recogniz
On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Greg Stein wrote:
> This is where process gets in the way of just doing the right thing.
> Backport it for chrissakes.
amen.
This is where process gets in the way of just doing the right thing.
Backport it for chrissakes.
-g
On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 06:39:58PM -0800, Stas Bekman wrote:
> Stas Bekman wrote:
>
> > Here is an adjusted patch, I've s/include/INCLUDES/ in your suggestion.
>
> Now committed. please +1 to bac
Stas Bekman wrote:
Here is an adjusted patch, I've s/include/INCLUDES/ in your suggestion.
Now committed. please +1 to backport in STATUS so we can move on...
Index: modules/filters/mod_include.c
===
RCS file: /home/cvs/httpd-2.0/mod
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
At 12:37 PM 12/9/2003, Stas Bekman wrote:
Does this look good?
ap_log_rerror(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_WARNING, 0, r,
"mod_include: Options +Includes (or IncludesNoExec) "
- "wasn't set, passing data unmodified");
+
At 12:37 PM 12/9/2003, Stas Bekman wrote:
>Does this look good?
>
> ap_log_rerror(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_WARNING, 0, r,
> "mod_include: Options +Includes (or IncludesNoExec) "
>- "wasn't set, passing data unmodified");
>+ "wasn't s
Stas Bekman wrote:
Does this look good?
Index: modules/filters/mod_include.c
===
RCS file: /home/cvs/httpd-2.0/modules/filters/mod_include.c,v
retrieving revision 1.291
diff -u -r1.291 mod_include.c
--- modules/filters/mod_include.c
Stas Bekman wrote:
Jeff Trawick wrote:
[...]
&include_module);
if (!(ap_allow_options(r) & OPT_INCLUDES)) {
+ap_log_rerror(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_WARNING, 0, r,
+ "mod_include: Options +Includes (or
IncludesNoExec) "
+ "wasn't set, passi
Jeff Trawick wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
complain via error_log when mod_include's INCLUDES filter is
enabled, but the relevant Options flag allowing the filter to run
for the specific resource wasn't set, so that the filter won't
silently get skipped.
Index: mo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
complain via error_log when mod_include's INCLUDES filter is
enabled, but the relevant Options flag allowing the filter to run
for the specific resource wasn't set, so that the filter won't
silently get skipped.
Index: mod_include.c
===
Well I would if I could, but it seems that /tmp is full and
cvs activity is failing for me.
Jeff Trawick wrote:
Paul J. Reder wrote:
Specifically, my thinking was that *I* wasn't the one who had
initially done the work and felt felt I shouldn't take credit
for anything other than what I did, which
Paul J. Reder wrote:
Specifically, my thinking was that *I* wasn't the one who had
initially done the work and felt felt I shouldn't take credit
for anything other than what I did, which was to do a quick
review and then backport it. I did assume that backporting
would imply a review. It was just e
Specifically, my thinking was that *I* wasn't the one who had
initially done the work and felt felt I shouldn't take credit
for anything other than what I did, which was to do a quick
review and then backport it. I did assume that backporting
would imply a review. It was just easier for me to backp
Greg Stein wrote:
On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 06:18:19PM -0400, Jeff Trawick wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
rederpj 2003/07/15 14:03:10
Modified:.CHANGES
...
This should be simply
*) Eliminate creation of a temporary table in ap_get_mime_headers_core()
[Joe Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTEC
On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 06:18:19PM -0400, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >rederpj 2003/07/15 14:03:10
> >
> > Modified:.CHANGES
>...
> This should be simply
>
> *) Eliminate creation of a temporary table in ap_get_mime_headers_core()
>[Joe Schaefer <[EMAIL PR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
rederpj 2003/07/15 14:03:10
Modified:.CHANGES
Index: CHANGES
===
RCS file: /home/cvs/httpd-2.0/CHANGES,v
retrieving revision 1.1229
retrieving revision 1.1230
diff -u -r1.1229 -r
At 09:49 PM 3/29/2003, Brian Pane wrote:
>To bring everybody up to date on this issue...
>I re-tested forward and reverse proxying with this latest
>change, and both worked correctly. Jeff did some research
>and found that the proxy error he encountered was due to a
>bad test case.
Yowzer... soun
To bring everybody up to date on this issue...
I re-tested forward and reverse proxying with this latest
change, and both worked correctly. Jeff did some research
and found that the proxy error he encountered was due to a
bad test case.
Brian
On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 10:42, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> [E
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
brianp 2003/03/29 08:32:22
Modified:server protocol.c
.CHANGES
Log:
Simplify and shorten the code path for scanning request headers
Reviewed by: Greg Ames, Bill Rowe
Houston, we may have a problem...
A simple proxy regression tes
* Aaron Bannert ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
>
> On Wednesday, March 12, 2003, at 12:51 PM, Oden Eriksson wrote:
> >Anyway..., despite this enormous disregard or what it is called,
> >mandrake
> >Linux will be the first distribution shipping apache2 (my packaging),
> >_plus_
> >a whole bunch of
On Wednesday, March 12, 2003, at 12:51 PM, Oden Eriksson wrote:
Anyway..., despite this enormous disregard or what it is called,
mandrake
Linux will be the first distribution shipping apache2 (my packaging),
_plus_
a whole bunch of other server like stuff I have packed.
Um, hasn't RH8.0 been shi
Wednesday 12 March 2003 19.44 skrev Ian Holsman:
> I care.
> I actually used your packaging to base our internal ones on. I do belive
> that apache needs a .spec file, but have been too busy to go through the
> hassle of doing it (not that a spec file is hard, its arguing about the
> layout and wha
At 12:41 PM 3/12/2003, Oden Eriksson wrote:
>Sorry for bothering you, but I really would like to know how to unsunbscribe
>from this cvs list.
Oden, what's with the cross-posting, a parting gift?
Anyways, you need to look at your message headers;
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
list-unsubscri
Wednesday 12 March 2003 19.25 skrev [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> trawick 2003/03/12 10:25:39
>
> Modified:.CHANGES
> Log:
> reflect a fix merged to 2.0.45-dev
Hi.
Sorry for bothering you, but I really would like to know how to unsunbscribe
from this cvs list.
I have done my part i
Greg Ames wrote:
Aaron Bannert wrote:
> I see the need for letting patches age in the unstable tree, but
> I think we could do that without having to vote on each and
> every change.
Yeah, that's what I meant by "lazy consensus" in the STATUS file.
I would think lazy consensus would be when som
Aaron Bannert wrote:
On Thursday, February 27, 2003, at 07:56 AM, Greg Ames wrote:
Most of us have committed bug fixes with the best of intentions which
were not quite complete or had unintended side effects. I certainly
have - the deferred write pool stuff in core_output_filter comes to
mind
On Thursday, February 27, 2003, at 07:56 AM, Greg Ames wrote:
Most of us have committed bug fixes with the best of intentions which
were not quite complete or had unintended side effects. I certainly
have - the deferred write pool stuff in core_output_filter comes to
mind. Letting the fixes a
Greg Ames wrote:
mind. Letting the fixes age a bit in the unstable tree reduces the
probability of unpleasant surprises happening in the stable tree, at
least for mainline code. We can be extra diligent about
reviewing/testing changes that we know are not mainline.
Note that for me and perhaps
Greg Stein wrote:
On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 05:10:12PM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On Thursday, February 27, 2003 12:02 PM +1100 Stas Bekman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So if absolutely anything added to the dev branch must have a vote
for before merging back to the stable branch, I stand co
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On Wednesday, February 26, 2003 7:55 PM -0800 Greg Stein
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
And remember: this *is* source control. If somebody commits a bug
fix and people want to shoot it down, then we can revert it. But
assuming correctness and committing the fix is hella be
Greg Stein wrote:
On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 05:10:12PM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>--On Thursday, February 27, 2003 12:02 PM +1100 Stas Bekman
> wrote:
>
>
>>So if absolutely anything added to the dev branch must have a vote
>>for before merging back to the stable branch, I stand corrected and
--On Wednesday, February 26, 2003 7:55 PM -0800 Greg Stein
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
And remember: this *is* source control. If somebody commits a bug
fix and people want to shoot it down, then we can revert it. But
assuming correctness and committing the fix is hella better than
gating every si
On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 05:10:12PM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> --On Thursday, February 27, 2003 12:02 PM +1100 Stas Bekman
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > So if absolutely anything added to the dev branch must have a vote
> > for before merging back to the stable branch, I stand correcte
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
wrowe 2003/02/26 11:03:00
Modified:.CHANGES
Log:
Brad, Stas, I presume these patches were first committed to 2.1-dev.
Please keep the CHANGES logs in sync!
Duh! Sorry for being a troublemaker. I thought that CHANGES in the dev tree
includes o
--On Thursday, February 27, 2003 12:02 PM +1100 Stas Bekman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So if absolutely anything added to the dev branch must have a vote
for before merging back to the stable branch, I stand corrected and
will make sure that this won't happen again in the future. I
thought that t
Jeff Trawick wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
stas2003/02/25 15:33:55
Modified:server Tag: APACHE_2_0_BRANCH connection.c
.Tag: APACHE_2_0_BRANCH CHANGES
Log:
check the return value of ap_run_pre_connection(). So if the
pre_connection phase fails (witho
The LDAP memory leak fix was added to the 2.1 tree with the SSL changes
that I commited a couple of weeks ago. Since I had to fix the caching
fault in both trees anyway, I also back ported the memory leak fixes to
the 2.0 tree. Both trees are in sync as far as the caching fault and
memory leak fi
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
stas2003/02/25 15:33:55
Modified:server Tag: APACHE_2_0_BRANCH connection.c
.Tag: APACHE_2_0_BRANCH CHANGES
Log:
check the return value of ap_run_pre_connection(). So if the
pre_connection phase fails (without setting c->aborte
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On Thursday, January 09, 2003 16:51:54 -0500 Greg Ames
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* apr-util's make dies with
Makefile:23: /tmp/inst_apr/bin/build/rules.mk: No such file or directory
make: *** No rule to make target `/tmp/inst_apr/bin/build/rules.mk'.
Stop.
hmmm, lo
--On Thursday, January 09, 2003 16:51:54 -0500 Greg Ames
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
more weirdness. I'm trying to verify that there is some way to get
Apache to build with apr & apr-util preinstalled outside of httpd. So
far I've seen:
* apr-util's configure dies with
configure: error: cannot
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On Wednesday, January 8, 2003 7:54 AM -0500 Jeff Trawick
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As I posted yesterday, generation of exports.c is busted without
srclib/apr and srclib/apr-util.
If you can get it to work with just the buildconf change, I'd love
to see it.
Well,
--On Thursday, January 9, 2003 11:07 AM -0500 Greg Ames
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
just to be sure everybody is on the same page, is there a
srclib/apr[-util]/ under httpd in the test above at any point?
Only when buildconf is run. The resulting tarball should not require
srclib/apr[-util].
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On Wednesday, January 8, 2003 9:43 AM -0500 Jeff Trawick
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm sorry for being dense, but please clarify:
What patch do you suggest to apply to STRIKER_2_0_44_PRE2, and will
the following then work?
httpd-2.0/buildconf r1.29. Then, the con
--On Wednesday, January 8, 2003 9:43 AM -0500 Jeff Trawick
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm sorry for being dense, but please clarify:
What patch do you suggest to apply to STRIKER_2_0_44_PRE2, and will
the following then work?
httpd-2.0/buildconf r1.29. Then, the configure.in patch that was
c
Justin Erenkrantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> --On Wednesday, January 8, 2003 7:54 AM -0500 Jeff Trawick
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > As I posted yesterday, generation of exports.c is busted without
> > srclib/apr and srclib/apr-util.
> >
> > If you can get it to work with just the buildc
--On Wednesday, January 8, 2003 7:54 AM -0500 Jeff Trawick
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As I posted yesterday, generation of exports.c is busted without
srclib/apr and srclib/apr-util.
If you can get it to work with just the buildconf change, I'd love
to see it.
Well, it doesn't work if you don'
Justin Erenkrantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> --On Wednesday, January 8, 2003 7:32 AM -0500 Jeff Trawick
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The problem on 2.0 with this "proper fix" is that make fails later
> > on if you don't have srclib/apr, so such a change doesn't seem
> > helpful.
>
> Det
--On Wednesday, January 8, 2003 7:32 AM -0500 Jeff Trawick
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The problem on 2.0 with this "proper fix" is that make fails later
on if you don't have srclib/apr, so such a change doesn't seem
helpful.
Details please? -- justin
Justin Erenkrantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> --On Tuesday, January 07, 2003 22:02:19 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > gregames2003/01/07 14:02:19
> >
> > Modified:.Tag: APACHE_2_0_BRANCH CHANGES configure.in
> > Log:
> > switch back to using srclib/apr/build for AC_CO
This was only done on the branch as a mean to get 2.0.44 out the door *now*
rather than continuing to wait for "just that one additional fix"
The head (2.1-dev) still has the original code.
-g
On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 03:50:26PM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> --On Tuesday, January 07, 2003 22:
--On Tuesday, January 07, 2003 22:02:19 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
gregames2003/01/07 14:02:19
Modified:.Tag: APACHE_2_0_BRANCH CHANGES configure.in
Log:
switch back to using srclib/apr/build for AC_CONFIG_AUX_DIR so DSOs can
be built with libtool < 1.4.
This is ex
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 29 November 2002 12:07
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 CHANGES
>
>
> wsanchez2002/11/29 03:06:39
>
> Modified:.CHANGES
> Log:
[...]
> + *) build: '
On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 04:55, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> > brianp 2002/10/06 22:10:54
> >
> > Modified:modules/http http_protocol.c
> >.CHANGES
>
> beware... this is the only interesting code change I see recently, so
> I'll reply to t
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> brianp 2002/10/06 22:10:54
>
> Modified:modules/http http_protocol.c
>.CHANGES
beware... this is the only interesting code change I see recently, so
I'll reply to this commit :)
over the night I had regression tests segfault on AI
On Sun, Jul 14, 2002 at 09:30:17PM -0700, Brian Pane wrote:
> Well, threaded MPMs or large vhost configurations won't run as
> shipped. And the httpd doesn't increase its own fd limit like
> competing servers do (or like 1.3 does, for that matter). And
> until this fix, the httpd wasn't operatin
Aaron Bannert wrote:
>On Sun, Jul 14, 2002 at 09:09:46PM -0700, Brian Pane wrote:
>
>
>>It's
>>unreasonable to make the every admin responsible for hacking
>>their start scripts to work around our broken product.
>>
>>
>
>In what way is our product broken?
>
Well, threaded MPMs or large vh
On Sun, Jul 14, 2002 at 09:09:46PM -0700, Brian Pane wrote:
> It's
> unreasonable to make the every admin responsible for hacking
> their start scripts to work around our broken product.
In what way is our product broken?
In order to use our product in certain ways your system may have
to be con
Aaron Bannert wrote:
>I really don't like this. It adds unnecessary complexity to the configure
>script,
>
There's nothing unnecessary about it.
> misleads admins in to thinking that they have to rerun configure
>to set the file limit,
>
No, nowhwere do we say "you have to rerun configure to s
I really don't like this. It adds unnecessary complexity to the configure
script, misleads admins in to thinking that they have to rerun configure
to set the file limit, and does something that should just be set by
the admin themselves at starttime.
-aaron
On Sun, Jul 14, 2002 at 11:18:46PM -0
On Mon, 10 Jun 2002, Doug MacEachern wrote:
> i'd be surprised if 'SSLOptions +OptRengotiate' actually ever worked for
> anybody before this change, including the 1.3 based modssl which still has
> this issue.
i take that back a bit, i'd be surprised if it worked for anybody using
netscape 4
just a note on this, SSLOptions +OptRengotiate simulates what
s3_srvr.c:ssl3_get_client_certificate would do when calling
ssl_verify_cert_chain() with the certs presented by the client.
for whatever reason, when the cert chain is saved to the session cache,
the peer cert is removed from the ch
On Sat, 11 May 2002, Brian Pane wrote:
> I guess ap_set_int_slot() plus AP_INIT_FLAG would work...
> but why do all the other on/off directives in the server
> not use that technique? Are they just older than the
> set_int_slot/AP_INIT_FLAG API?
As far as I know, that's all it is. Well, that a
Cliff Woolley wrote:
>On 11 May 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
>
>>brianp 02/05/11 16:24:29
>>
>> Modified:include http_core.h
>> server core.c
>> .CHANGES
>> Log:
>> Added EnableMMAP directive to allow the server administrator to
>> preven
On 11 May 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> brianp 02/05/11 16:24:29
>
> Modified:include http_core.h
>server core.c
>.CHANGES
> Log:
> Added EnableMMAP directive to allow the server administrator to
> prevent mmap of file buckets upon rea
>dougm 02/03/31 09:32:23
>
> Revision ChangesPath
> 1.673 +3 -0 httpd-2.0/CHANGES
>
> --- CHANGES 31 Mar 2002 12:42:51 - 1.672
> +++ CHANGES 31 Mar 2002 17:32:23 - 1.673
> @@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
>Changes with Apache 2.0.34
>
> + *) implement ssl
On Sun, 31 Mar 2002, Brian Pane wrote:
> Should that be in the 2.0.34 section, or the 2.0.35 one?
wrowe has moved HEAD to the 2.0.34 tag, which includes the ssl proxy
changes.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> @@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
> Changes with Apache 2.0.34
>
> + *) implement ssl proxy to support ProxyPass / https:// and the
> + SSLProxy* directives [Doug MacEachern]
>
Should that be in the 2.0.34 section, or the 2.0.35 one?
--Brian
At 03:33 PM 2/27/2002, Cliff Woolley wrote:
>On 27 Feb 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > + *) Introduce PassPhraseDialog "|/path/to/pipe" mechanism to mod_ssl.
> > + This pipe must be a bidirectional 'console' style relay, which
> > + mod_perl prints all prompts to the pipe's stdi
On 27 Feb 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> + *) Introduce PassPhraseDialog "|/path/to/pipe" mechanism to mod_ssl.
> + This pipe must be a bidirectional 'console' style relay, which
> + mod_perl prints all prompts to the pipe's stdin, and reads the
> + passphrases from the pipe
Aaron Bannert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 07:04:11PM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >
> > > aaron 01/12/12 15:56:46
> > >
> > > Modified:server mpm_common.c
> > >.CHANGES
> > > Log:
> > > Fix a bug i
On Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 07:04:11PM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> > aaron 01/12/12 15:56:46
> >
> > Modified:server mpm_common.c
> >.CHANGES
> > Log:
> > Fix a bug in how we select the IP for the POD to connect to for dummy
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> aaron 01/12/12 15:56:46
>
> Modified:server mpm_common.c
>.CHANGES
> Log:
> Fix a bug in how we select the IP for the POD to connect to for dummy
> connects (dislodging a doomed child from the accept mutex). No longer
> do
Cliff Woolley wrote:
>
> The was " I'm so anal-retentive it's ridiculous"
That's not so bad. When you don't dare sit down for fear that
you'll suck up the furniture, now *that's* anally-retentive.. :-)
--
#kenP-)}
Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Golux.Com/coar/
Author, develope
On Monday 12 November 2001 11:33 pm, Jon Travis wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2001 at 11:16:52PM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > On Monday 12 November 2001 11:06 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > jwoolley01/11/12 23:06:42
> > >
> > > Modified:.CHANGES
> > > Log:
> > > I was original
On Monday 12 November 2001 11:30 pm, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Nov 2001, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > On Monday 12 November 2001 11:06 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > jwoolley01/11/12 23:06:42
> > >
> > > Modified:.CHANGES
> > > Log:
> > > I was originally just going to s
On Mon, Nov 12, 2001 at 11:16:52PM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Monday 12 November 2001 11:06 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > jwoolley01/11/12 23:06:42
> >
> > Modified:.CHANGES
> > Log:
> > I was originally just going to s/commans/commas/, and then I got
> > carried away
On Mon, 12 Nov 2001, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Monday 12 November 2001 11:06 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > jwoolley01/11/12 23:06:42
> >
> > Modified:.CHANGES
> > Log:
> > I was originally just going to s/commans/commas/, and then I got
> > carried away and rewrote half th
On Monday 12 November 2001 11:06 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> jwoolley01/11/12 23:06:42
>
> Modified:.CHANGES
> Log:
> I was originally just going to s/commans/commas/, and then I got
> carried away and rewrote half the paragraph.
Hey, I never said I could write well.
On Fri, 2 Nov 2001, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> I need to double check that it works out of the box, but ++1 on concept
> for adding it to 2.0.27.
Verified. It'd be nice if the apachectl patch to get "apachectl startssl"
working went in with it since the default config uses that IfDefine
thingy, but
On Fri, 2 Nov 2001, Greg Ames wrote:
> Mainly because I didn't test it. If someone else is willing to vouch
> for it and we think it needs to be in 2.0.27, I'll do it.
Correct SSL configure is a must to get it to work right with all browsers
(see the modssl-users list for all the headaches peop
"Roy T. Fielding" wrote:
>
> If you are going to bump the tag, why not bump it for ssl-std.conf too?
Mainly because I didn't test it. If someone else is willing to vouch
for it and we think it needs to be in 2.0.27, I'll do it.
Greg
On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 06:53:26AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> jerenkrantz01/09/18 23:53:26
>
> Modified:server Makefile.in
>modules/loggers mod_log_config.c
>.CHANGES
> Added: include util_time.h
>server util_ti
98 matches
Mail list logo
