...
--
===
Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball.
- mod_wombat IP clearance done. (import happening RSN)
Anything else anyone can come up with?
Not really.
--
===
Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
If you can dodge
Yep. No problem.
On Feb 21, 2007, at 4:50 AM, Marc Stern wrote:
Is it also possible to make a post with this ?
This is what I need.
Jim Jagielski wrote:
How could we use mod_proxy for outgoing connections from another
module ?
Is there any simple way ?
Is there any standard (I mean
There have been times when having a simple sed filter in Apache
would be useful... I used to use just ext_filter to do this,
but this got more and more painful the more I used it. So awhile
ago I made mod_sed_filter which I find pretty useful. I've just
built and tested in with 2.2 and trunk...
On Mar 13, 2007, at 1:10 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Is this sed or pcre syntax? I'm a bit confused :)
It's a mutant ;) But, of course, we maintain
that confusion internally with regex's being pcre...
Although it's sed-ish, is it misleading to confuse the user with the
phrase sed
On Mar 13, 2007, at 2:08 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
AFAICS, this not merely looks like mod_line_edit: the filter *is*
mod_line_edit, right down to the bucket manipulation logic used as
an example in The Book! It's just missing a couple of minor features,
and has a slightly different configuration
On Mar 13, 2007, at 3:34 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Mar 13, 2007, at 1:10 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Is this sed or pcre syntax? I'm a bit confused :)
It's a mutant ;) But, of course, we maintain
that confusion internally with regex's being pcre
On Mar 14, 2007, at 5:07 AM, Frank wrote:
RewriteBodyLine 'http://(.*?)/(.*)/(.*)' 'http://${LOWERCASE:$1}/$
{MD5:$2}/$3'
Yeah, that would be useful... Of course, the main issue is
that whereas mod_rewrite can afford to be dog slow, because,
after all, the URLs aren't *that* big,
On Mar 14, 2007, at 11:01 AM, Nick Kew wrote:
Oh, I guess you mean the copying to get a null-terminated string
when applying a regexp? And I see it's repeated for every regexp
(ouch)! mod_line_edit uses a local pool which is cleared at the
end of each brigade, and avoids multiple copies of
As a rough proof of concept, I refactored the design,
allowing for the pattern matching and substitution to be
done as soon as we have a line. Also is some
rough ability to pass the data to the next filter
after we get more than ~AP_MIN_BYTES_TO_WRITE bytes.
Doesn't alleviate all the problems,
I'll be offline most of tomorrow and pretty much the whole
weekend. Unless I hear vetos, I'll commit the latest
mod_sed_filter.c to trunk. If we change the name, which
is fine with me, well... that's the joy of svn move :)
On Mar 16, 2007, at 8:52 AM, Mathias Herberts wrote:
I agree that reusing the backend connections can be a good thing, but
there are times when this is just not a very good idea.
I agree that there are times when having a single-shot
connection is better than having a pool. It's
certainly
On Feb 28, 2007, at 11:59 AM, Dziugas Baltrunas wrote:
Hi, list,
attaching same patch with small correction to the one submitted
previously (was unnecessary double check for PROXYREQ_REVERSE).
Patch is for httpd-2.2.x branch.
Patches should be against trunk. Once approved
and proven in
On Apr 4, 2007, at 8:46 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
But this means that we break the ABI here. If struct proxy_balancer
is part
of a public API (I am not sure about this) this would require a
major bump
and would prevent backporting.
Since the whole idea of loadable lb method
On Apr 4, 2007, at 9:38 AM, Mladen Turk wrote:
Plüm wrote:
Yes, although MAX_ENTRIES would be 3 for now
(cookie, path and env)
But this means that we break the ABI here. If struct
proxy_balancer is part
of a public API (I am not sure about this) this would require a
major bump
and
On Apr 4, 2007, at 10:27 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
Hmmm... I like this idea. Not sure about the use of '/'
as the delim (simply because of its other meanings) but
that's secondary.
Of course, we can't use strtok, since sticky is a const
char and we can't be shoving NULLs in there :)
On Apr 4, 2007, at 11:34 AM, Georg von Zezschwitz wrote:
Jim Jagielski schrieb:
Rüdiger's point is that we would be doing the scanning
for each and every request, which is wasteful since they
aren't changing. Even in the above the strlen() is
counting chars that don't change between requests
On Apr 5, 2007, at 7:16 PM, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
I would like to propose two enhancements to mod_ftp.
The same way we have FTPJailUser and CreateHomeDir directives, we
would need
FTPJailGroup and CreateGroupDirs directives.
This would allow us manage FTP files based on groups,
On Apr 11, 2007, at 3:34 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 04/11/2007 06:42 PM, Filipe wrote:
I'm trying to use apache to proxy a push application, using chunked
transfer
encoding. The problem is that the mod_proxy buffers the server
response
internally and only sends the data to the client
On Apr 12, 2007, at 10:16 AM, Joe Orton wrote:
On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 10:05:06AM -0400, Jeff Trawick wrote:
I wonder why Error in ProxyErrorOverride doesn't match the meaning
of ap_is_HTTP_ERROR(), as in the attached patch (with doc).
Great, +1
1xx isn't something the user should
On Apr 13, 2007, at 5:20 AM, Mladen Turk wrote:
Anyhow, I'll commit a patch to the trunk for http, cause its
configurable by flushwait and skipped otherwise.
Looking forward to seeing it... recall that if we flush at
every chunk with HTTP, we will be dead slow and filters
will not be happy
On Apr 13, 2007, at 5:20 AM, Mladen Turk wrote:
Plüm wrote:
+1 I will try to check it once you have proposed it and give it
a quick vote.
I have another one that fixes this issues for non-chunked content.
I haven't tried yet, but IMHO it should already work for non-chunked
content. Is this
On Apr 13, 2007, at 11:34 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Apr 13, 2007, at 5:20 AM, Mladen Turk wrote:
Plüm wrote:
+1 I will try to check it once you have proposed it and give it
a quick vote.
I have another one that fixes this issues for non-chunked content.
I haven't tried yet, but IMHO
On Apr 13, 2007, at 12:03 PM, Mladen Turk wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Not according to my tests. The simple server push still
buffers the data.
Hmmm a followup commit has:
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=504559
so that may be exactly the case...
Huh, looks like it works
It would be best, I think, if the patches actually used normal
httpd coding standards... The whole MAX_OVLP_LINE stuff is very
out of place.
On Apr 25, 2007, at 10:02 AM, Juerg Umhang wrote:
its now in bugzilla. patches submitted
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42216
--
On Apr 18, 2007, at 1:22 PM, Guenter Knauf wrote:
Hi,
the current code fails to build for Win32 target.
This is because ftp_glob.c seems not APR-ised yet;
I'm actually looking at removing the whole glob stuff
and emulating it as regexes...
On Apr 19, 2007, at 6:25 PM, moh bad wrote:
Hi,
within a module,
what is the best way to store data, who need to be accessible to
all threads and process ?
1/ using shared memory, with apr_shm_*
#1
On Apr 21, 2007, at 12:28 AM, Saju Pillai wrote:
Read-Write data ? shm is ok. Any standard IPC should work.
apr provides this.
On Apr 23, 2007, at 1:20 PM, Brad Nicholes wrote:
+1, go ahead and commit it.
Brad
+1
On Apr 23, 2007, at 10:46 AM, Brian J. France wrote:
On Apr 23, 2007, at 10:32 AM, Jakob Goldbach wrote:
-1 on the face of things. The map_to_storage hook was added to
accomplish
what you desire.
I thought map_to_storage was made to do per-dir configuration. Not
path-translation.
The
On Apr 26, 2007, at 8:55 AM, Niklas Edmundsson wrote:
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Apr 18, 2007, at 1:22 PM, Guenter Knauf wrote:
Hi,
the current code fails to build for Win32 target.
This is because ftp_glob.c seems not APR-ised yet;
I'm actually looking at removing
On Apr 26, 2007, at 9:22 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Apr 26, 2007, at 8:55 AM, Niklas Edmundsson wrote:
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Apr 18, 2007, at 1:22 PM, Guenter Knauf wrote:
Hi,
the current code fails to build for Win32 target.
This is because ftp_glob.c seems
On Apr 26, 2007, at 11:58 AM, Nick Kew wrote:
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 07:21:27 -0700 (PDT)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-26
07:21 --- (In reply to comment #7)
Anything I can do to help get this bug fixed? Is testing the patch
all that
On Apr 26, 2007, at 5:39 PM, Niklas Edmundsson wrote:
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007, Jim Jagielski wrote:
I'm actually looking at removing the whole glob stuff
and emulating it as regexes...
Wouldn't apr_match_glob() be a better starting point? I don't
really see the point of going via regexes
On Apr 26, 2007, at 5:52 PM, Sander Temme wrote:
Community,
As ApacheCon draws near, perhaps we should plan some httpd releases
during the week? Between beer and bitterballen there must be time
to bat some patches around(1). Going in with the intention of,
say, a TR on Wednesday after
Are you sure that there are no other conflicting ACLs?
On Apr 27, 2007, at 1:30 PM, Patrick Welche wrote:
Basically, bug or configuration error?
Using httpd trunk 529626, of Apr 19 2007, I tried a FAQ configuration
with the new authentication framework:
Directory
On Apr 27, 2007, at 5:18 PM, Niklas Edmundsson wrote:
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Jim Jagielski wrote:
I'm actually looking at removing the whole glob stuff
and emulating it as regexes...
Wouldn't apr_match_glob() be a better starting point? I don't
really see the point of going via regexes...
I
On Apr 28, 2007, at 1:34 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Apr 27, 2007, at 5:18 PM, Niklas Edmundsson wrote:
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Jim Jagielski wrote:
I'm actually looking at removing the whole glob stuff
and emulating it as regexes...
Wouldn't apr_match_glob() be a better starting point? I
On Apr 28, 2007, at 1:40 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
In fact, to be honest, it would be easier still to just
update ftp_direntry_get() to use apr_fnmatch(), since we
always want to support globing. ftp_direntry_get already
does most of what makes apr_match_glob attractive in
the 1st place
On May 3, 2007, at 4:37 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Niklas Edmundsson wrote:
On Wed, 2 May 2007, Jim Jagielski wrote:
In fact, to be honest, it would be easier still to just
update ftp_direntry_get() to use apr_fnmatch(), since we
always want to support globing. ftp_direntry_get already
On May 4, 2007, at 11:37 AM, Brian Hayward wrote:
I have 2 questions:
1) What are the negative implications of disabling this?
2) Is there a cleaner way to accomplish this?
So you just want to setup Apache so that even if it
thinks there's an error, to just ignore it?
allowing someone
to set that as an option might be a potential
enhancement...
On May 4, 2007, at 2:16 PM, Brian Hayward wrote:
Yea, as it currently stands, one timeout is causing us to lose up to
10 more transactions during the next second (with retry=1)
Thanks,
Brian Hayward
On 5/4/07, Jim
Seems to me that the more we work on the various 2.x trees
(2.0.x, 2.2.x and trunk), the harder it becomes to get
the various correct CHANGES entries in sync... For example,
the CHANGES for 2.2 and trunk just refer to changes up
to 2.0.56... What's the best way of syncing these? Should
we stop
On May 9, 2007, at 8:18 AM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On May 8, 2007, at 11:25 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+#define USE_ALTERNATE_IS_CONNECTED 1
+
+#if !defined(APR_MSG_PEEK) defined(MSG_PEEK)
+#define APR_MSG_PEEK MSG_PEEK
+#endif
+
+#if USE_ALTERNATE_IS_CONNECTED defined(APR_MSG_PEEK)
On May 9, 2007, at 8:55 AM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On May 9, 2007, at 5:32 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 9, 2007, at 8:18 AM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On May 8, 2007, at 11:25 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+#define USE_ALTERNATE_IS_CONNECTED 1
+
+#if !defined(APR_MSG_PEEK) defined(MSG_PEEK
On May 11, 2007, at 5:23 PM, Mladen Turk wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
1. ProxyPass /foo/* balancer://bar
should silently rewrite itself to
ProxyPass /foo/ balancer://bar
In other words, we already assume a prefix
glob. But should we? In other words
On May 11, 2007, at 5:39 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
On Fri, 11 May 2007 15:19:58 -0400
Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been looking at extending ProxyPass to
accept and use globbing patterns (basically,
to make it easier for those migrating from
mod_jk and JkMount to Apache 2.2
On May 11, 2007, at 5:56 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 05/11/2007 11:23 PM, Mladen Turk wrote:
And of course once you introduce wild char maps there must
be some sort of exclusion rules.
ProxyPass /*/foo/* balancer://bar
then for example by extending ProxyBlock
ProxyBlock /*/foo/*.gif
On May 12, 2007, at 3:46 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
Do we really need this?
As we know from Rich's lightning talk at the ApacheCon every
directive
can be replaced by a rewrite rule :-).
Except that mod_rewrite is not balancer aware... so using
rewrite rules uses the default reverse
On May 12, 2007, at 10:09 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Still, just because mod_rewrite allows it doesn't mean we
shouldn't allow ProxyPass to do what's right. ;)
in any case, added to trunk... next step is to also
make the Directory container method work...
On May 12, 2007, at 12:45 PM, Joshua Slive wrote:
On 05/12/2007 04:12 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: jim
Date: Sat May 12 07:12:24 2007
New Revision: 537429
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=537429
Log:
Add regex pattern matching to ProxyPass, allowing,
for example:
On May 12, 2007, at 11:19 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 05/12/2007 04:15 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 12, 2007, at 10:09 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Still, just because mod_rewrite allows it doesn't mean we
shouldn't allow ProxyPass to do what's right. ;)
in any case, added to trunk
On May 13, 2007, at 1:01 AM, Paul Querna wrote:
Well... I think we should consider a more generic way to do this.
What I would like to see is something like
AddHandler gif proxy=balancer://bar
If mod_proxy knew about a handler syntax like this, you could do
lots of
creative things,
On May 12, 2007, at 11:10 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
Sorry for being picky here: One space too much.
...
Again I am picky here: Too many spaces.
No worries. Good catches.
On May 13, 2007, at 3:07 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 05/12/2007 05:10 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 05/12/2007 04:12 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: jim
Date: Sat May 12 07:12:24 2007
New Revision: 537429
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=537429
Log:
Add regex pattern
On May 14, 2007, at 4:18 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
What would folks think about changing
if (ap_strchr_c(arg, '*') != NULL) {
/* Prevent DOS attacks, only allow one segment to have a
wildcard */
int found = 0; /* The number of segments with a
wildcard */
On May 19, 2007, at 3:22 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 05/19/2007 04:07 PM, Eric Covener wrote:
On 5/18/07, Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Currently ProxyTimeout does not work as documented as the default
value is not
300 secs, but the Timeout setting of the server. The question
On May 18, 2007, at 5:26 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On 5/18/07, Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, because rv == !OK, wouldn't the CACHE_REMOVE_URL filter hit?
That should do the dirty deed, no? -- justin
No, as the CACHE_REMOVE_URL filter will only work if there is a
On May 24, 2007, at 8:50 AM, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 08:05:30AM -0400, Joshua Slive wrote:
External links are encouraged where they add substantial value, but
you may not link to your own pages or otherwise seek private benefits
from external links.
I like the
On May 24, 2007, at 4:04 AM, Sander Temme wrote:
On May 23, 2007, at 4:39 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
[ ] Revert to |foo to invoke foo, and
add |$foo syntax to launch foo via sh
I like this one the best, since it consumes fewest resources in the
default case.
[ ] Retain
On May 29, 2007, at 5:28 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Essentially, PID tables need to move from the score to a local process
list only in the parent, and unshared. That would solve the 80/20 of
this entire class of issues.
Yes... Of course, it doesn't even need to be that extensive.
If
On May 30, 2007, at 1:56 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
I'd like to see new tarballs rolled soonish, given the single
significant
bug that was disclosed earlier today.
Obviously most mass-vhosters are capable of compiling their own
binary,
so providing the seperate-pid-table patch
On May 30, 2007, at 2:57 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 05/30/2007 08:10 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 29, 2007, at 5:28 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Essentially, PID tables need to move from the score to a local
process
list only in the parent, and unshared. That would solve
On May 30, 2007, at 2:41 PM, Sander Temme wrote:
On May 29, 2007, at 10:56 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
I volunteer to roll 1.3 when it's ready, since Sander offered to
roll 2.2
(and perhaps 2.0?)
I'll be happy to RM both.
I'd like to, but my time will be sporadic enough the next
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 05/30/2007 09:45 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 30, 2007, at 2:57 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 05/30/2007 08:10 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 29, 2007, at 5:28 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Essentially, PID tables need to move from
For 1.3, I'm looking at something like this...
Similar approach for 2.x...
Comments and feedback appreciated before I work on
porting to the 2.x trees:
Index: main/http_main.c
===
--- main/http_main.c(revision 543486)
+++
On Jun 1, 2007, at 10:19 AM, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 10:05:26AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
- if (ap_scoreboard_image-servers[n].status != SERVER_DEAD
- kill((pid = ap_scoreboard_image-parent[n].pid), 0) == -1) {
- ap_update_child_status
On Jun 1, 2007, at 10:45 AM, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 10:50:09AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Should we get rid of it from the table here? Can we get away without
removing stale pids in general? What if they are recycled by the OS
for something else?
No, that's
On Jun 1, 2007, at 11:39 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
I will likely just commit the updated patch, and we
can fine-tune via commits rather than having rounds
of patches posted :)
I just started on the trunk patches, not sure when they
will be done... anyway, I was think that in addition
On Jun 1, 2007, at 3:35 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
FWIW, I've created a branch of the work in progress, so
people can follow along and provide comments and patches :)
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/httpd-pid-
table
this is based off of trunk, so once we have
be somewhat faster and simpler to do. Of course
we waste more memory.
We can afford the time taken I think, to save space and to
be more efficient... I really dislike all that wasted space :)
--
===
Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL
On Jun 2, 2007, at 3:57 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 06/02/2007 01:44 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: jim
Date: Fri Jun 1 16:44:36 2007
New Revision: 543667
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=543667
Log:
Minor nit... be consistent and unset even now :)
Modified:
On Jun 4, 2007, at 2:35 AM, David McCreedy wrote:
On 06/01/2007 05:42 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: jim
Date: Fri Jun 1 08:42:57 2007
New Revision: 543511
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=543511
Log:
Add in parent process PID table, to provide for
a check against
On Jun 4, 2007, at 2:35 AM, David McCreedy wrote:
On 06/01/2007 05:42 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: jim
Date: Fri Jun 1 08:42:57 2007
New Revision: 543511
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=543511
Log:
Add in parent process PID table, to provide for
a check against
On Jun 4, 2007, at 10:29 PM, David McCreedy wrote:
June 04, 2007 5:51 PM David McCreedy wrote:
On 06/01/2007 05:42 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think I squashed those. Could you check out
trunk and try another test? Thanks!
It fixes the Bad pid error but I'm not sure all is well...
On
It looks the the 1.3 pid_table impl is pretty much on target.
I've been testing the trunk (2.3.x) version with no issues that
I've been able to see, but was wondering how many others
are testing...
In the meantime, should I create a 2.2 branch for the 2.2-version
of the pid_table code and
+1 (concept)
On Jun 10, 2007, at 9:13 PM, Paul Querna wrote:
Attached is a patch that should let people run mod_ssl under the
Event MPM.
Previously, the event mpm would put a socket into its event thread to
wait for input, but due to issues with how mod_ssl might be buffering
data (or the
On Jun 6, 2007, at 9:13 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
In the meantime, should I create a 2.2 branch for the 2.2-version
of the pid_table code and backport the changes to that?
Unless I hear otherwise, I'll likely do that since the
backport from 2.2 to 2.0 shouldn't be that involved.
Done
Status Update:
The pid-table code is:
o Applied to 1.3 branch
o In httpd-2.0-pid-table branch (branches/2.0.x fork)
o In httpd-2.2-pid-table branch (branches/2.2.x fork)
o In httpd-pid-table branch (trunk fork)
Passes httpd-tests, as well as 'ab' with *very* small
On Jun 21, 2007, at 1:18 PM, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 05:51:34PM +0100, Joe Orton wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 09:29:25PM -, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Secondly: I think this approach is unnecessarily complex. I think
it's
sufficient to simply check whether
On Jun 21, 2007, at 12:51 PM, Joe Orton wrote:
Firstly my sincere apologies to Jim for bringing this up after such
considerable work was put in already - I've had a busy month with a
week
out for a holiday :(
Secondly: I think this approach is unnecessarily complex. I think
it's
On Jun 21, 2007, at 6:20 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Joe Orton wrote:
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 06:18:59PM +0100, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 05:51:34PM +0100, Joe Orton wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 09:29:25PM -, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Secondly: I think
On Jun 27, 2007, at 11:08 AM, Nick Kew wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 14:17:36 -
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+* mod_proxy: Arrange the timeout handling.
+ Trunk version of patch:
+http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrevision=550514
+
On Jun 27, 2007, at 12:20 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 06/27/2007 05:51 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Jun 27, 2007, at 11:08 AM, Nick Kew wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 14:17:36 -
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+* mod_proxy: Arrange the timeout handling.
+ Trunk version of patch
On Jun 27, 2007, at 12:40 PM, Joe Orton wrote:
Right: it adds overhead without benefit, and there is also a risk of
regressions. e.g. in the trunk code it looks like children from
ap_register_extra_mpm_process() don't go in the pid table, so the
reclaim_one_pid() path to kill them won't
On Jun 27, 2007, at 3:38 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
Hm. Wouldn't it make sense to log this in the case
waitret != APR_CHILD_DONE
as in the PID table patches?
This could give the admin a hint that something is rotten on his box.
+1 on the logging...
Looking forward to seeing the 1.3
On Jun 27, 2007, at 1:52 PM, Joe Orton wrote:
Here's the updated (and simpler) version of my patch which uses
apr_proc_wait() to determine whether a pid is a valid child.
Simplifies
the MPM logic a bit since the pid != 0 check is moved into
ap_mpm_safe_kill().
Tested for both prefork and
On Jun 28, 2007, at 7:56 AM, Joe Orton wrote:
So, final comments on this? If there's consensus that this is the
approach to take I'll revert the pidtable stuff out of trunk, commit
this there, and propose the backport.
Don't forget the 1.3 branch...
On Jul 4, 2007, at 12:52 PM, Joe Orton wrote:
On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 12:50:37PM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Jun 28, 2007, at 7:56 AM, Joe Orton wrote:
So, final comments on this? If there's consensus that this is the
approach to take I'll revert the pidtable stuff out of trunk, commit
On Jul 5, 2007, at 9:20 PM, Paul Querna wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Any interest in seeing if the Async write completion code in
trunk would be suitable for backporting to 2.2?
The biggest problem is that async write completion in trunk got
tied up
in doing async reads, and some of those
On Jul 17, 2007, at 10:31 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+if (*(workers-s-route) strcmp(workers-s-route,
route) == 0) {
Is that right? I'm guessing the 1st check was to make sure
that workers-s-route wasn't NULL (and therefore the strcmp
didn't dump), but instead you're checking
On Jul 17, 2007, at 12:48 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Jul 17, 2007, at 10:31 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+if (*(workers-s-route) strcmp(workers-s-
route, route) == 0) {
Is that right? I'm guessing the 1st check was to make sure
that workers-s-route
On Jul 19, 2007, at 10:49 AM, Sander Temme wrote:
On Jul 19, 2007, at 3:22 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
Now that the security related patches have been backported to
2.2.x is there
anything that prevents us from releasing 2.2.5?
Sander Temme volunteered to be the RM back in May. Is this
On Jul 26, 2007, at 3:46 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
This is correct (because provider-match is a union and provider-
match.string and
provider-match.regex are the same thing), but confusing. I would
prefer
checking provider-match.regex instead.
Seems to me that avoiding unions
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/how-to-release.html is
kind of dated and yes is in need of an update, but
I've never bothered doing so (except for the last
1.3 release, I've been RM for 1.3 for the last several
years)
The svn copy location however is
I went through and cleared out maybe 200 or so bugzilla bugs
for 1.3... Will start on the 2.x ones tomorrow and try to
clear out most of the crud there... We have some real old ones :)
Nick Kew wrote:
On Thu, 2 Aug 2007 16:30:25 -0400
Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I went through and cleared out maybe 200 or so bugzilla bugs
for 1.3... Will start on the 2.x ones tomorrow and try to
clear out most of the crud there... We have some real old ones :)
Nice
It's easy to be brave when being heartless :)
Lots of WONTFIX :)
Tony Stevenson wrote:
Impressive feat, takes a brave man to take on that many bugs!
Jim Jagielski wrote:
I went through and cleared out maybe 200 or so bugzilla bugs
for 1.3... Will start on the 2.x ones tomorrow and try
This PR (correctly) states that we aren't tagging double
quote as a tspecial/separator. Adding it in causes
no regressions, but I'm surprised that we haven't had more
issues about its absence, which makes me nervous about
changing it now...
Comments?
Lets shoot for a TR of 1.3, 2.0 and 2.2 on Aug 10th... That
means a possible release on the 13th. That way, admins
aren't compelled to upgrade before/during the weekend (other-
wise, TR on the 8th and release on the 10th would make
sense)
I volunteer to RM 1.3 and even 2.2.
afaict, 1.3 and 2.0
201 - 300 of 4498 matches
Mail list logo