Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
Index: alloc.c
===
RCS file: /e/apache/cvs/apache-1.3/src/main/alloc.c,v
retrieving revision 1.145
diff -u -d -r1.145 alloc.c
--- alloc.c 20 Jun 2003 15:05:40 - 1.145
+++ alloc.c 29 Jul 2003
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
Index: alloc.c
===
RCS file: /e/apache/cvs/apache-1.3/src/main/alloc.c,v
retrieving revision 1.145
diff -u -d -r1.145 alloc.c
--- alloc.c 20 Jun 2003 15:05:40 - 1.145
+++ alloc.c
On Mon, 4 Aug 2003, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
Unix entity is still hanging around (for you) unless you (the parent)
successfully fetched its status. So the important point here is that a
child process cannot just disappear (for whatever reasons!) and even be
replaced until the parent has
Cliff Woolley wrote:
On Mon, 4 Aug 2003, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
Unix entity is still hanging around (for you) unless you (the parent)
successfully fetched its status. So the important point here is that a
child process cannot just disappear (for whatever reasons!) and even be
replaced until
On Tue, 29 Jul 2003, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
Index: alloc.c
===
RCS file: /e/apache/cvs/apache-1.3/src/main/alloc.c,v
retrieving revision 1.145
diff -u -d -r1.145 alloc.c
--- alloc.c 20 Jun 2003 15:05:40 - 1.145
Cliff Woolley wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2003, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
Index: alloc.c
===
RCS file: /e/apache/cvs/apache-1.3/src/main/alloc.c,v
retrieving revision 1.145
diff -u -d -r1.145 alloc.c
--- alloc.c 20 Jun 2003 15:05:40
On Sat, 2 Aug 2003, Bill Stoddard wrote:
- if (ap_os_kill(p-pid, SIGTERM) == -1) {
-p-kill_how = kill_never;
-}
-else {
- need_timeout = 1;
-}
+ ap_os_kill(p-pid, SIGTERM);
+ need_timeout = 1;
So you
On Sun, Jul 20, 2003, Cliff Woolley wrote:
For those not watching the bugzilla notices, I direct your attention to
bug 21737:
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21737
Apparently there has been a regression in 1.3.28 from 1.3.27 whereby
CGI scripts are getting left around as
Hi Cliff Woolley,
For those not watching the bugzilla notices, I direct your attention to
bug 21737:
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21737
Apparently there has been a regression in 1.3.28 from 1.3.27 whereby CGI
scripts are getting left around as zombies when suexec is
On Tue, 22 Jul 2003, Adam Warner wrote:
Just a long shot but is the regression in 2.0.47 as well? I've been
getting defunct processes with nothing being served and the clincher is
that all my HTML pages are served via CGI/suexec.
While it's certainly possible it's broken in 2.0.47, it's
For those not watching the bugzilla notices, I direct your attention to
bug 21737:
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21737
Apparently there has been a regression in 1.3.28 from 1.3.27 whereby
CGI scripts are getting left around as zombies when suexec is in use,
apparently
On Sun, 20 Jul 2003, Cliff Woolley wrote:
For those not watching the bugzilla notices, I direct your attention to
bug 21737:
Oops, Joshua already posted about this. Sorry about the dupe. :)
12 matches
Mail list logo