Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy writes:
I think a properly designed site should insist on its host name, i.e. I
see you think I'm gobbledygook.bleh, but I'm going to redirect you to
http://www.modpython.org/ because that is my true name. This is very
common with sites that respond to both
Jim Gallacher wrote:
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
I don't know what the specific issue is with parsed_uri, if this is a
mod_python bug it should just be fixed BUT if this is an issue with
httpd, I don't think we should cover the problem up by having
mod_python fix it. Since we are
Filin A. wrote:
But after I read your question I made an experiment
whith my system httpd.conf and php.ini and checked
phpinfo() output.
I've set the extension_dir in php.ini to the wrong
directory and assigned correct value in the
httpd.conf. It's strange but though phpinfo()
acknowledges my
flood STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2004-11-24 19:36:41 -0500 (Wed, 24 Nov 2004) $]
Release:
1.0: Released July 23, 2002
milestone-03: Tagged January 16, 2002
ASF-transfer: Released July 17, 2001
httpd-test/perl-framework STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2004-11-24 19:36:41 -0500 (Wed, 24 Nov 2004) $]
Stuff to do:
* finish the t/TEST exit code issue (ORed with 0x2C if
framework failed)
* change existing tests that frob the
[Aside - I posted a similar query to the users list and got a
couple of suggestions but no solution, so I'm reposting here]
In brief:
I'm trying to build http 2.0.55 against openssl 0.9.8a.
I've built (but not installed) a local copy of openssl, with
shared libraries. I've built http like
thx
this seems to be the proper fix, but
how do i apply it? which tool do i need for patching the sourcecode?
sorry for asking such newby questions. i am new to opensourcedevelopment.
alos: can u tell me if my way of fixing the problem was wrong and why?
what is it with brigades and buckets
Nick Kew wrote:
On Tuesday 29 November 2005 20:49, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On November 29, 2005 3:40:11 PM -0500 Paul A Houle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
* prefork and worker seem to be about equally fast on linux?
Yup - this is because forking and threading are equivalent (by and
Nick Kew wrote:
Hmmm, how about an early adopters page? We could *imply* the
organisations by featuring mugshots and brief profiles of both
Brian and Colm as having successfully beta-tested 2.1.x in
very-high-volume production environments.
Perhaps, as long as it wasn't tied directly to
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
Well, lets not even come close to risking that.
I'm in the process of having an internal whitepaper I did being
sanitized for public consumption. Once that's done -- hopefully this
week or next -- everything in it is quotable.
--
Brian Akins
Lead Systems
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 10:05:19AM +, Stephen Collyer wrote:
[Aside - I posted a similar query to the users list and got a
couple of suggestions but no solution, so I'm reposting here]
In brief:
I'm trying to build http 2.0.55 against openssl 0.9.8a.
I've built (but not installed) a
Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Can you try HEAD on httpd-trunk for a fix until something
more robust as far as the connections are implemented...
It gets the backend-connections right, but segfaults in the new code in
proxy_util.c.
I got the following out of a coredump:
dbx:
Jess Holle wrote:
So if one uses worker and few processes (i.e. lots of threads per),
then Solaris should be fine?
That's what people think, but I'd like to see some numbers.
I've never put a worker Apache into production because most of our
systems depend on PHP or something else
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 11:01:55AM -0500, Paul A Houle wrote:
So if one uses worker and few processes (i.e. lots of threads per),
then Solaris should be fine?
That's what people think, but I'd like to see some numbers.
I've never put a worker Apache into production because most of
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
I've never put a worker Apache into production because most of our
systems depend on PHP or something else which I wouldn't trust 100% in a
threaded configuration.
Is there anything we can do in 2.4/3.0 that will help gain that trust?
PHP, or it's extensions or
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 08:01:41AM -0500, Brian Akins wrote:
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
It's public knowledge that CNN.com runs Apache 2.2, would it cause you
a lot of trouble for that to be referenced?
As long as it's from public sources (netcraft, HTTP headers,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
http://people.apache.org/~rbowen/httxt2dbm_proposed_patch
I'd like to copy httx2dbm back into 2.0 from 2.1.
This is primarily because I'm tired of telling folks that they can
generate RewriteMap dbm files using httxt2dbm if they happen to be
running
Brian Akins wrote:
I have been given word that our statements can appear in a press release
or testimonial, it just has to be passed through legal here. So what
type of statements are we looking for?
Let's bring the Apache Public Relations Committee into this to see what
advice they have.
Joshua Slive wrote:
By the way, are you using
2.0 or 2.1?
BOth. 2.1 in higher traffic now.
--
Brian Akins
Lead Systems Engineer
CNN Internet Technologies
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
Is there anything we can do in 2.4/3.0 that will help gain that trust?
It's not Apache's fault. It's not even PHP's fault. It's a much
bigger problem with the open source libraries that people link into
PHP, Perl, Python and the like.
The problem is
These might also be useful in patches-to-apply upon release :)
==
--- httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS (original)
+++ httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS Wed Nov 30 08:27:14 2005
@@ -67,8 +67,16 @@
RELEASE
Brian Akins writes:
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
I've never put a worker Apache into production because most of our
systems depend on PHP or something else which I wouldn't trust 100% in a
threaded configuration.
Is there anything we can do in 2.4/3.0 that will help gain that trust?
As for the larger issue at hand: the reason req.parsed_uri is not
filled in is because browsers don't send the info in the GET...
Disclaimer: What follows is not an exhaustive, conclusive search by
tracing running code, but rather searching source code and watching
apache behaviour with tools
Paul A Houle wrote:
Jess Holle wrote:
So if one uses worker and few processes (i.e. lots of threads per),
then Solaris should be fine?
That's what people think, but I'd like to see some numbers.
I've never put a worker Apache into production because most of our
systems depend on
On 11/30/05, Colm MacCarthaigh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 11:01:55AM -0500, Paul A Houle wrote:
So if one uses worker and few processes (i.e. lots of threads per),
then Solaris should be fine?
That's what people think, but I'd like to see some numbers.
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 11:17:13AM -0500, Rich Bowen wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
http://people.apache.org/~rbowen/httxt2dbm_proposed_patch
I'd like to copy httx2dbm back into 2.0 from 2.1.
This is primarily because I'm tired of telling folks that they can
On Wednesday 30 November 2005 16:30, Paul A Houle wrote:
PHP's market position is as a product that any idiot can download
and install, just following the instructions, and get a system with
good reliability and performance -- a painful phase of shaking out
threading bugs would endanger
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 11:25:06AM -0500, Joshua Slive wrote:
Re Brian's question above, I think we want a statement emphasizing
performance and scalability. It doesn't need to be extremely precise,
spec-wise. Most people reading a press release wouldn't care. We just
want to transmit
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 05:13:07PM +, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 11:25:06AM -0500, Joshua Slive wrote:
Re Brian's question above, I think we want a statement emphasizing
performance and scalability. It doesn't need to be extremely precise,
spec-wise. Most
Let my try to contribute my $.02:
Usually, a PR item which tells about company X delivered product Y to
customer Z, is signed by both - X and Z. Since most of the
organizations don't exist for charity but for business, Z must earn
something out of this PR. Sometimes, the fact that Z agreed to be
Nick Kew wrote:
That looks a lot like Windows' market position. And I suspect it's no
accident: both products have heaped on new 'goodies', all too often
at the expense of other considerations. It's IMO also no accident
that PHP is moving towards a Windows-like security track record.
Ahh... no doubt conn-hostname is NULL
Hansjoerg Pehofer wrote:
Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Can you try HEAD on httpd-trunk for a fix until something
more robust as far as the connections are implemented...
It gets the backend-connections right, but segfaults in the new
This is cool stuff, thanks!
I'm quessing that perhaps req.parsed_uri makes a lot more sense when
Apache is used as a proxy, in which case what follows GET is the full URL.
Perhaps we can add something to the docs that says this attribute gets
its data from the argument to the HTTP GET
On Wednesday 30 November 2005 18:27, Paul A Houle wrote:
Nick Kew wrote:
That looks a lot like Windows' market position. And I suspect it's no
accident: both products have heaped on new 'goodies', all too often
at the expense of other considerations. It's IMO also no accident
that PHP
Jorey Bump writes:
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
Perhaps we can add something to the docs that says this attribute gets
its data from the argument to the HTTP GET method, which is usually just
the path in the URL and does not include the protocol, hostname and
port. It is only
On Nov 29, 2005, at 4:55 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 11/29/2005 04:12 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Can you try HEAD on httpd-trunk for a fix until something
more robust as far as the connections are implemented...
Just for convenience:
http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=349723view=rev
Has
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 09:19:25AM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
I'll just remind everyone this is a public list and its archived too. =)
If you wish to keep things private, we can use [EMAIL PROTECTED] and possibly
the PMC list. Yes, there's a difference between including it in a PR and
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
Thanks, and just to make the prc aware of one more thing; our release of
2.2.0 will be done ten years to the day (well in as much as a day can be
put on it) since Apache 1.0.0. The first ever Apache httpd GA. There may
well be some PR in that too :)
I feel old...
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 11:52:38AM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On November 30, 2005 7:39:08 PM + Colm MacCarthaigh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Thanks, and just to make the prc aware of one more thing; our release of
2.2.0 will be done ten years to the day (well in as much as a day
2005/11/30, Jim Gallacher [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
At this point I think we should leave parsed_uri alone, as it seems todo the correct thing - if not the desired thing. At a minimum we shouldexpand the documentation to warn people of the limitations. I still
think it would be useful to have a tuple
Ooops from your definition it looks like this holds :
req.unparsed_uri = req.uri + req.path_info
So we'd better use unparsed_uri to reconstitute the original absolute URL.
Before the publisher computes path_info it must be empty, so in this case req.unparsed_uri == req.uri. I'll check this.
On Nov 30, 2005, at 11:56 AM, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 11:52:38AM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On November 30, 2005 7:39:08 PM + Colm MacCarthaigh
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Thanks, and just to make the prc aware of one more thing; our
release of
2.2.0 will
On Wednesday 30 November 2005 20:09, Sander Temme wrote:
It's a great display of our commitment to stability, long-term
strategic
planning and thinking, enterprise-grade development and trustworthy
convervatism. Right? ;-)
Yes and we should milk that for all it's worth.
There was talk
Daniel J. Popowich wrote:
Jorey Bump writes:
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
Perhaps we can add something to the docs that says this attribute gets
its data from the argument to the HTTP GET method, which is usually just
the path in the URL and does not include the protocol, hostname
Jim Gallacher wrote:
Using an internal_redirect messes with some of these attributes but not
others. Those that change get their new values from the new_uri used in
the redirect. Unchanged values are from the initial request.
req.internal_redirect(new_uri)
the_requestunchanged
Joe Orton wrote:
It's pretty silly for anybody to suddenly wake up and declare some
random bug as a showstopper for 2.2. Nobody has cared enough about the
problem to fix it in the six months and four(?) 2.1.x alpha/beta
releases that mod_dbd has been in the tree. So it clearly isn't really
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Joe Orton wrote:
Win32 is not special. It's a second-class citizen if anything because
it gets so little developer attention.
Now *that's* a statement for the Release Notes :)
Absolutely, add to this list AIX, OS2, Netware, BeOS, HPUX and many others.
Not to mention
Joost de Heer wrote:
Win32 is not special. It's a second-class citizen if anything because
it gets so little developer attention.
And how many people compile the thing on Windows anyway, except the msi
builder? My guess is that I need about 2 hands to count them
Au contrare, I get
Jim Gallacher writes:
Jim Gallacher wrote:
Using an internal_redirect messes with some of these attributes but not
others. Those that change get their new values from the new_uri used in
the redirect. Unchanged values are from the initial request.
req.internal_redirect(new_uri)
Nick Kew wrote:
On Tuesday 29 November 2005 16:37, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-AP_DECLARE(void) ap_dbd_prepare(server_rec *s, const char *query,
+DBD_DECLARE(void) ap_dbd_prepare(server_rec *s, const char *query,
const char *label)
OK, other modules do this.
Nicolas Lehuen wrote:
2005/11/30, Jim Gallacher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
At this point I think we should leave parsed_uri alone, as it seems to
do the correct thing - if not the desired thing. At a minimum we should
expand the documentation to warn people of
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On November 29, 2005 3:40:11 PM -0500 Paul A Houle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
* prefork and worker seem to be about equally fast on linux?
* MacOS X?
fork() is *painfully* slow on the darwin kernel, I haven't tested but can't
imagine that threading isn't a huge
Daniel J. Popowich wrote:
Jorey Bump writes:
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
Perhaps we can add something to the docs that says this attribute gets
its data from the argument to the HTTP GET method, which is usually just
the path in the URL and does not include the protocol, hostname
Brian Akins wrote:
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
I've never put a worker Apache into production because most of our
systems depend on PHP or something else which I wouldn't trust 100%
in a threaded configuration.
Is there anything we can do in 2.4/3.0 that will help gain that trust?
PHP, or
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On November 30, 2005 7:39:08 PM + Colm MacCarthaigh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Figures that it'd take us 10 years to go from 1.0-2.2. ;-) -- justin
Good point, I propose we call this coming release 3.0 :)
Once 2.2 is released we'll be working to use it -- and distribute it
with our products -- on Windows, Solaris, and AIX.
I throw in patches relevant to these platforms when possible, but I
don't have the time or interest in native (non-Java) code anymore to
help out more.
--
Jess Holle
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Good point, I propose we call this coming release 3.0 :)
No It should be Apache HTTP X (ten). All the other cool things are at
10 (or close). Mac OS, Solaris, Suse, Redhat, Mandrake
--
Brian Akins
Lead Systems Engineer
CNN Internet Technologies
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, Jorey Bump wrote:
Can anyone conceive of a use case where it would be alright to rely on this
value, even when it's been arbitrarily populated by a client-supplied
absoluteURI (via a proxy, for example)? What would a developer expect to be
contained in this value? For
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 09:22:58PM +, Nick Kew wrote:
Can someone clarify: what happens *by default* if APR 1.0/1.1 is
found on a target machine? If it tries to build against that, I'd
support a -1. If it does something sensible - which could be emitting
an error message and refusing to
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, Jorey Bump wrote:
Nicolas Lehuen wrote:
2) Server name
Thanks to Daniel's excellent posts, I can see that req.hostname is the
best way to get the server name so far. Unfortunately, it depends on data
sent by the client, but hey, so does the rest of the request
On 11/30/2005 08:38 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Nov 29, 2005, at 4:55 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
[..cut..]
Has someone found out out why we close the connection if
r-proxyreq == PROXYREQ_PROXY || r-proxyreq == PROXYREQ_REVERSE?
I fear that this is something that has survived from 2.0.x.
Nick Kew wrote:
I diskile bundling APR, and dislike even more bundling third-party libs
like expat and pcre. But I thought I/we had just lost that argument
with louder voices.
We lost the argument over pcre; our requirement is apparently just a little
to particular to have the user obtain
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, Jorey Bump wrote:
req.add_common_vars()
servername = req.subprocess_env['SERVER_NAME']
That's a waste of CPU cycles, since add_common_vars() copies it from
req.server.server_hostname (most likely, haven't check for sure)
It
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 02:43:24PM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Exactly. I've stopped testing httpd-2.1.x because there was nobody
interested in testing apr-iconv 1.1.1, a prereq to httpd-2.1/2.2.
Without any community interest, httpd on Win32 is clearly my toy, not
a project port.
It
2005/11/30, Jim Gallacher [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
[snip]
Nicolas Lehuen wrote: Ah, while I'm at it, knowing the DocumentRoot of the current VirtualHost
would be great, too. But that's another story.I don't know that story. Is there a problem with req.document_root()?
Well, I think I'm doing a bad
Build the php5apache2.dll ( php 5.1.1 apache2handler) with 2.2.0 on Win32.
No issues.
Steffen
Daniel J. Popowich wrote:
Jim Gallacher writes:
Jim Gallacher wrote:
Using an internal_redirect messes with some of these attributes but not
others. Those that change get their new values from the new_uri used in
the redirect. Unchanged values are from the initial request.
Roy T.Fielding wrote:
This is exactly what I said I would do in the [vote] thread for 2.1.10.
No, it isn't -- you said that it was a vote to release 2.1.10. I assumed
that meant you were going to bump the version number in CVS. There were
several people who said they were +1 on 2.1.10 and
2005/11/30, Jorey Bump [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Finally, I'm getting the impression that most developers are looking fora portable way to get the ServerName, as defined in the Apacheconfiguration. This may currently be achieved in a variety of ways,including:
servername = req.server.server_hostnameor:
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 02:43:24PM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
It was hardly nobody, I may be shoddily inexperienced with the win32
port, but I did go to the trouble of testing apr-iconv on win32 and have
been regularly building 2.1/2.2 on win32 to make sure it
2005/11/30, Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, Jorey Bump wrote: Nicolas Lehuen wrote: 2) Server name Thanks to Daniel's excellent posts, I can see that req.hostname is the best way to get the server name so far. Unfortunately, it depends on data
sent by the
Note that this uri can in turn be splitted in something which is lost by
the publisher and the req.path_info field, that is IIRC that we can
assert(req.uri.endswith(req.path_info)). I don't know what req.path_info
is before the publisher kicks in, though.
I'm not sure I understand
On 11/30/05, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 02:43:24PM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
It was hardly nobody, I may be shoddily inexperienced with the win32
port, but I did go to the trouble of testing apr-iconv on win32
Jorey Bump wrote:
Even better, deprecate req.hostname in 3.2, where we can add req.host to
contain the value in req.headers_in['Host']. Then drop req.hostname in
3.3 completely. This will give developers some time to adapt.
It's too late to be deprecating anything in 3.2. I know it seems like
Nicolas Lehuen writes:
a) Handlers and published modules seem to behave the same way, so the
computation of path_info must come from above, i.e. either from mod_python
or from Apache.
b) We've got req.uri == req.subprocess_env.get(SCRIPT_NAME) +
req.subprocess_env.get(PATH_INFO). Cool, but
On 11/30/2005 11:53 AM, Matthias Behrens wrote:
thx
this seems to be the proper fix, but
how do i apply it? which tool do i need for patching the sourcecode?
sorry for asking such newby questions. i am new to opensourcedevelopment.
Ok. Let me summarize: You found the reason for the
Olaf van der Spek wrote:
Wouldn't it help if (beta) binaries are posted to
http://httpd.apache.org/download.cgi?
In general yes. In the case I mentioned, NO - you cannot post a candidate
which hasn't received 3 +1's, and you certainly cannot push it out to the
mirrors.
But our alphas/betas
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 11:54:19PM +0100, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
Ok. Let me summarize: You found the reason for the problem (which was
really not easy in this case) but you do not know how to apply a patch
to the source code. You are using Outlook for your mail and
www.gulp.de runs on a Windows
[EMAIL PROTECTED] httpd-2.2]$ ./buildconf
You don't have a copy of the apr source in srclib/apr.
Please get the source using the following instructions,
or specify the location of the source with
--with-apr=[path to apr] :
svn co http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/apr/apr/trunk srclib/apr
You
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 09:22:58PM +, Nick Kew wrote:
Can someone clarify: what happens *by default* if APR 1.0/1.1 is
found on a target machine? If it tries to build against that, I'd
support a -1. If it does something sensible - which could be emitting
an error
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 09:22:58PM +, Nick Kew wrote:
Can someone clarify: what happens *by default* if APR 1.0/1.1 is
found on a target machine? If it tries to build against that, I'd
support a -1. If it does something sensible - which could be emitting
an error
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 06:33:51PM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Ok, so explain to me why we wasted a MB or two distributing srclib/apr/
and srclib/apr-util/ when the result is;
That's not the result when you don't have apr/apu 1.x [x:2] installed.
apr and apr-util 1.2 are bundled for
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 06:39:30PM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Ok, now what the heck?
Looks like you've pointed the --with-apr options at trees which have
been built, but arn't installed targets. find_apr.m4 tests for
bin/apr-1-config
--
Colm MacCárthaighPublic
On Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 12:59:12AM +, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 06:39:30PM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Ok, now what the heck?
Looks like you've pointed the --with-apr options at trees which have
been built, but arn't installed targets. find_apr.m4 tests for
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
If apr 1.0 or 1.1 happen to be installed, I don't see why it's not
reasonable to fail to configure. The administrator may intend to link
against the system version, they may not want httpd having its own
libapr. And they're the only people capable of making that decision
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 07:10:37PM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
* admins who install 1.1 for some specific reason are responsible to
ensure they deal with the new package correctly (e.g., we give them
a message upon configure Found old APR 1.1.0, installing APR 1.2.2
for you
On Nov 30, 2005, at 4:39 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
./configure --prefix=/usr/local --with-apr=srclib/apr --with-apr-
util=srclib/apr-util
checking for chosen layout... Apache
[...]
checking for APR version 1.2.0 or later... yes
checking for APR-util version 1.2.0 or later... no
On Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 01:25:38AM +, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
There's no reason why this can't be fixed during 2.2, but with a months
old issue, and no sign of a patch, should it hold up a GA?
No way. -- justin
APACHE 2.0 STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2005-11-21 15:22:22 -0500 (Mon, 21 Nov 2005) $]
The current version of this file can be found at:
* http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/2.0.x/STATUS
Documentation status is
APACHE 2.3 STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2005-11-13 02:22:18 -0500 (Sun, 13 Nov 2005) $]
The current version of this file can be found at:
* http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/STATUS
Documentation status is maintained
Sander Temme wrote:
On Nov 30, 2005, at 4:39 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
./configure --prefix=/usr/local --with-apr=srclib/apr --with-apr-
util=srclib/apr-util
checking for chosen layout... Apache
[...]
checking for APR version 1.2.0 or later... yes
checking for APR-util version 1.2.0 or
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
There's no reason why this can't be fixed during 2.2, but with a months
old issue, and no sign of a patch, should it hold up a GA?
I'm 100% conviced next to nobody on this list has been developing and testing
httpd-2.2/apr-1.2 without their own in-tree tweaks. I'm as
On Nov 30, 2005, at 10:10 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Sander Temme wrote:
On Nov 30, 2005, at 4:39 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
./configure --prefix=/usr/local --with-apr=srclib/apr --with-apr-
util=srclib/apr-util
checking for chosen layout... Apache
[...]
checking for APR version
On Nov 30, 2005, at 10:12 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
I'm 100% conviced next to nobody on this list has been developing
and testing
httpd-2.2/apr-1.2 without their own in-tree tweaks. I'm as guilty
as anyone.
So we've been compiling and improving the code, but the build/
install
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 10:35:07PM -0800, Sander Temme wrote:
I'm looking at this. If you give that apu buildconf the right --with-
apr parameter, buildconf completes. The problem is, if the
Just to reiterate - buildconf is not necessary for users to run.
On Nov 30, 2005, at 10:53 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 10:35:07PM -0800, Sander Temme wrote:
I'm looking at this. If you give that apu buildconf the right --
with- apr parameter, buildconf completes. The problem is, if the
Just to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Nov 28, 2005, at 11:55 PM, Paul Querna wrote:
Available from:
http://people.apache.org/~pquerna/dev/httpd-2.2.0/
Please vote on releasing as GA/Stable.
+1 for release as 2.2.0. I have verified the signatures, compared
the contents, diffed
On Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 12:53:22AM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Is buildconf present? If the user runs it, does it corrupt the unpacked
tree?
Um.
Have you even *tried* to run './buildconf' in an extracted httpd 2.2.0
tarball? I have - guess what? It works just fine. Therefore, there
98 matches
Mail list logo
