Sorry again for the lack of attachment. :(
There definitely is confusion here and it's definitely my
fault. First, the lack of attachment. Second, I have
made this both a fix *and* a feature both of which only
apply to the 2.0 line.
I'm including the patch again and can modify it to include
Ack, I'm so sorry for not including the attachment. Further
complicating the issue, for some reason, emails from this
list are getting eaten or delayed by my company's server and
so I didn't even see the responses to my original mail until
now, a week later. :(
(I've always felt that email
Chris H. wrote:
Quoting Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Feb 5, 2008, at 2:52 PM, Ronald Park wrote:
Attached is my patch to 2.0.63 to the proxy_http.c file in
modules/proxy.
I didn't see any attached patch... :/
Without the patch the whole discussion is useless ;-(
In any case,
On Feb 6, 2008, at 5:04 PM, Chris H. wrote:
Quoting Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Feb 5, 2008, at 2:52 PM, Ronald Park wrote:
Attached is my patch to 2.0.63 to the proxy_http.c file in
modules/proxy.
I didn't see any attached patch... :/
In any case, the normal process is patch
On Feb 5, 2008, at 2:52 PM, Ronald Park wrote:
Attached is my patch to 2.0.63 to the proxy_http.c file in
modules/proxy.
I didn't see any attached patch... :/
In any case, the normal process is patch applied to
trunk with then backport proposals to 2.2 and 2.0. A feature
added to 2.0.x,
Quoting Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Feb 5, 2008, at 2:52 PM, Ronald Park wrote:
Attached is my patch to 2.0.63 to the proxy_http.c file in
modules/proxy.
I didn't see any attached patch... :/
In any case, the normal process is patch applied to
trunk with then backport proposals
The problem and patch in the below message are in regards to just
the Apache 2.0 line; it seems like a number of improvements in
timeout handling have already been implemented in the 2.2 version
of mod_proxy.
However, also included in my patch is a mechanism to provide even
more granularity in
