Ville Skyttä [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/170401
Dirk Nehring pointed out a missing cast in apreq_escape() and submitted
a patch, see attachment. This appears to bite when using a C++ compiler
with apreq_util.h.
Thanks, applied as r312985.
--
Joe Schaefer
* Maxime Petazzoni wrote:
Actually, I feel that last example makes it a pain in the ass for the
rest of us humans to email someone about something.
No, because you have the full string From: header displayed :
From: Justin Erenkrantz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
And I hope the rest of us humans
Paul Querna wrote:
2. There are several formats for each mail message (regular, raw,
mime). Probably the links to everything other than the standard
format should use the rel=nofollow modifier to keep the search
engines out. Keeping the robots off of 2/3 of the links could make a
big
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Question;
I'm looking for input what version of visual c++ we should build apr 1.x
and httpd 2.1.x and onwards with. As most are aware, discrepancies in
the clib mean that mismatched posix open()/close(), malloc()/free() can
all cause serious problems, so a single
On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 02:07:56AM -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
I'm looking for input what version of visual c++ we should build apr 1.x
and httpd 2.1.x and onwards with. As most are aware, discrepancies in
the clib mean that mismatched posix open()/close(), malloc()/free() can
all
Luc Pardon said:
In that case the 2.0 httpd.spec files should either a) not require
pre-installed apr packages and build apr as part of the httpd rpm,
A definite -1 on this. If this were so, httpd could not coexist cleanly
with other packages that depended on APR.
or b)
build the
Graham Leggett wrote:
Luc Pardon said:
In that case the 2.0 httpd.spec files should either a) not require
pre-installed apr packages and build apr as part of the httpd rpm,
A definite -1 on this. If this were so, httpd could not coexist cleanly
with other packages that depended
Colm MacCarthaigh said:
How many people actually build RPM's is what I'm wondering, given the
errors that creep in in the releases, and we don't see that many
complaints, it can't be a very high number. I see a fair amount of
downloads for the RPM's files themselves, which is what makes me
Luc Pardon said:
Yes, but what got me confused is that the httpd tarball comes with
the APR source (hence the docs don't talk about it as being a
prerequisite) whereas the current spec file requires you to go elsewhere
and get something that is already there. It seem to me that this kind
On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 01:34:16PM +0200, Graham Leggett wrote:
We provide SRPMs for building, which contain fixed httpd.spec files.
I see people downloading them a fair ammount ( 400 per day, which is
actually quite a lot for the binaries section), and I don't see why
these would discontinue.
Colm MacCarthaigh said:
I see people downloading them a fair ammount ( 400 per day, which is
actually quite a lot for the binaries section), and I don't see why
these would discontinue. So, would it be so bad a thing if the release
tarball wasn't itself buildable?
The release tarball should
On Oct 10, 2005, at 5:13 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 10/10/2005 05:43 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
For consideration:
[..cut..]
Thanks for your thoughts.
BTW: It was a little bit tricky to apply the patch as my Mozilla
seems to have changed things in the mail spaces / empty lines.
So I
Nick Kew wrote:
Paul Querna wrote:
2. There are several formats for each mail message (regular, raw,
mime). Probably the links to everything other than the standard
format should use the rel=nofollow modifier to keep the search
engines out. Keeping the robots off of 2/3 of the links
On Tuesday 11 October 2005 15:05, Joshua Slive wrote:
More importantly, any mail archive without nofollow in the messages
becomes a spam magnet. Here's some nice free googlerank for
http://dodgy.pills.example.com/?refid=yourstruly
Well, we don't want to keep search engines out of the
On Oct 10, 2005, at 5:13 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
2. The xml output is currently broken as it only works with schema
and hostname.
I am not quite sure if
1. there is an xml schema already defined for this and needs to
be adjusted
2. we need to parse the worker name and replace
Nick Kew wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Talking of windows builds, where's mod_ssl seems to be something of
a FAQ in user support. Why is it a problem *now* to include it?
You can find some of that discussion burried in legal-discuss@, while
the new VP of legal affairs is taking up the
Graham Leggett wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. said:
The problem is that packaging is almost a 20/20 hindsite game. There's
no way we should expect that all of these many platform specifics can
all be maintained pre-release. That's why, in the Win32 .msi case,
there is a seperate
On Tue, 11 Oct 2005, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Question;
I'm looking for input what version of visual c++ we should build apr 1.x
and httpd 2.1.x and onwards with. As most are aware, discrepancies in
the clib mean that mismatched posix open()/close(), malloc()/free() can
all cause serious
On Tuesday 11 October 2005 17:02, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
One decision to be made by the project is; will -we- ship openssl
binaries? Or the module built against some .dll versions available
on www.openssl.org?
Surely, the latter, and point to it in our docs!
Datapoint: mod_proxy_html
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
3. We should probably turn on the email-address-obfiscation feature. I
personally would prefer if everyone could just use proper spam
filtering, but I think the general expectation nowadays is that we try
to avoid displaying raw addresses.
I think this feature is
Randy Kobes wrote:
On Tue, 11 Oct 2005, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Question;
I'm looking for input what version of visual c++ we should build apr 1.x
and httpd 2.1.x and onwards with. As most are aware, discrepancies in
the clib mean that mismatched posix open()/close(), malloc()/free() can
On 10/11/2005 04:33 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Oct 10, 2005, at 5:13 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
[..cut..]
Not sure what the (original) intent of the XML format was or is,
but I'm assuming that the current implementation is sufficient.
As it is an undocumented feature right now
--On October 11, 2005 1:24:22 PM -0400 Joshua Slive [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As has been pointed out, this is a trade off. You can get real
protection at the cost of losing the ability to find real email
addresses. Or you can get protection that will work against 95% or more
of current
Just a ping. Anybody found some time to look into the issue below?
Thanks and regards
Rüdiger
Original Message
Subject: [PATCH] worker status change during creation of backend proxy
connection
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 14:29:13 +0200
From: Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Oct 11, 2005, at 3:13 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
Sorry, too impatient again :-(. Nevertheless apart from the xml
stuff, any
comments about the latest version of the patch I attached yesterday?
+1... I haven't looked to see if there's a better way to
do the 'longest match' test, but
On 10/11/2005 09:56 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
[..cut..]
+1... I haven't looked to see if there's a better way to
do the 'longest match' test, but that's nit picking :)
Ok, thanks. I think I will commit it tomorrow to trunk and 2.2.x.
Regards
Rüdiger
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 10/11/2005 09:56 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
[..cut..]
+1... I haven't looked to see if there's a better way to
do the 'longest match' test, but that's nit picking :)
Ok, thanks. I think I will commit it tomorrow to trunk and 2.2.x.
I can do it if
On 10/11/2005 11:22 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 10/11/2005 09:56 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
[..cut..]
+1... I haven't looked to see if there's a better way to
do the 'longest match' test, but that's nit picking :)
Ok, thanks. I think I will commit it tomorrow to
=?UTF-8?B?UsO8ZGlnZXIgUGzDvG0=?= wrote:
Just saw it on #httpd-dev.
BTW: Never seen you there so far.
I hate IRC. It's a real time sinkhole :) Plus, it avoids the
danger of doing development on IRC instead of on the mailing
lists where it belongs... I occasionally am on IM and IRC
however,
On 10/11/2005 11:51 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
I hate IRC. It's a real time sinkhole :) Plus, it avoids the
danger of doing development on IRC instead of on the mailing
lists where it belongs... I occasionally am on IM and IRC
however, but rarely :)
All very true :-).
BTW: I just
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32658.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 10/11/2005 11:51 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
I hate IRC. It's a real time sinkhole :) Plus, it avoids the
danger of doing development on IRC instead of on the mailing
lists where it belongs... I occasionally am on IM and IRC
however, but rarely :)
(Apologies for posting here and on the modules list - it just occured
to me that this might be a better place)
I'm playing around with log analysis at the moment - particularly
real time analysis. Currently I just pipe logs through a Perl script
that does the actual analysis. I'd quite
I note that mod_mbox now produces Atom 1.0 feeds. Excellent!
= = =
There is a feedvalidator that can be used to identify areas of improvement.
http://www.feedvalidator.org/
The highest priority is to make sure that the encoding is correct. As
it currently stands, many of these feeds are
Sam Ruby wrote:
The highest priority is to make sure that the encoding is correct. As
it currently stands, many of these feeds are not well formed XML,
meaning that they will be rejected by conformant XML parsers. Fixing
this will improve the usability of the HTML pages.
An outline of what
On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 10:54:36AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
I will be TR'ing 1.3.34 On Tues or Weds
May I humbly request inclusion of a patch I wrote almost a year ago?
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31858
|31858|New|Maj|2004-10-22|regular expression matching broken on
Glenn Strauss wrote:
On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 10:54:36AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
I will be TR'ing 1.3.34 On Tues or Weds
May I humbly request inclusion of a patch I wrote almost a year ago?
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31858
|31858|New|Maj|2004-10-22|regular
And frankly it's about damn time. There are a variety of corporate
product deployments still using various bastardized versions of the
apache 1.3 tree. It's disgusting the number of security holes that
these often latent-version derivatives induce without any kind of
secondary access controls
Garrett Rooney wrote:
It just comes down to two questions. Do we want to offer the service,
and if so, what resource utilization do we want to optimize for?
If they are running an atom client, is it unreasonable to also force
mod_deflate upon them to further conserve bandwidth? IIUC, with
Paul Querna wrote:
Hell, if we want to optimize for bandwidth, we really should enable
mod_deflate, which is pretty damn effective
Someday I'll start using the exciting read-ahead features of Firefox.
(read: down arrow key :-)
On 10/10/05, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Garrett Rooney wrote:
It just comes down to two questions. Do we want to offer the service,
and if so, what resource utilization do we want to optimize for?
If they are running an atom client, is it unreasonable to also force
Question;
I'm looking for input what version of visual c++ we should build apr 1.x
and httpd 2.1.x and onwards with. As most are aware, discrepancies in
the clib mean that mismatched posix open()/close(), malloc()/free() can
all cause serious problems, so a single version is vastly preferable.
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
snip
This was a snafu in the way the rpm change was presented, not in the
tarballs. httpd-2.0's distribution tarball will always contain apr 0.9.
That doesn't mean httpd-2.2 (with apr 1.x) will do the same; that's yet
to be determined.
In that case the
* Paul Querna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-10-10 22:57:44]:
Maxime Petazzoni wrote:
* Justin Erenkrantz [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-10-10 22:33:16]:
3. We should probably turn on the email-address-obfiscation feature. I
personally would prefer if everyone could just use proper spam
filtering,
44 matches
Mail list logo
