Cool facility. Applied in 2.0 and 2.1. Care to author the docs patch?
I looked for different places to 'stick' this logic, and didn't find a better
alternative :-) Moving it to the switch block would give us interesting
side effects such as %{comment}% being replaced with a literal '%',
but on
At 09:12 AM 11/25/2002, Cliff Woolley wrote:
>On Sun, 24 Nov 2002, Aaron Bannert wrote:
>
>> We can make a duplicate of the httpd-2.0 CVS module and call it
>> httpd-2.1 or whatever the heck we want, and keep the history. Why do
>> we have to lose the history?
>>
>> -1 to losing the history
>
>That
At 08:26 PM 11/19/2002, André Malo wrote:
>Sorry, I don't want to harass someone, but there are two pending patches of
>mod_negotiation.c. This is just a reminder, since the patches seem to
>become overlooked and/or forgotten.
Not forgotten, but too low on the queue; sorry :-(
>Short summary o
At 09:56 AM 11/25/2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>At 08:26 PM 11/19/2002, André Malo wrote:
>
>>- body.patch sets the appropriate MIME headers, if a type map body is
>>applied (Content-language, Content-type; charset, Content-Encoding)
>
>Ok, digging into your pat
At 02:54 PM 11/25/2002, you wrote:
>jim 2002/11/25 12:54:59
>
> Modified:.Tag: APACHE_2_0_BRANCH STATUS
> Log:
> It appears that I am "unworthy" to have an opinion...
How do you mean? Don't read between the lines in my comments;
backseat drivers *are* welcome, and you are o
At 09:25 AM 11/25/2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>... I won't be too frustrated when folks start rehashing the decision
>for the next year. You may as well also start venting over how poor the
>old 1.3 is doing (but don't go fixing it, that would take away all the fun
&
At 03:55 PM 11/25/2002, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>I believe that the authoritative version of httpd-2.0 *must* remain in the repository
>called 'httpd-2.0.' I'm midly disturbed that it now contains 2.1 (mainly because
>there was no prior discussion about how to do the branching).
Before I remov
At 04:54 PM 11/25/2002, Brian Pane wrote:
>On Mon, 2002-11-25 at 14:03, Juan Rivera wrote:
>> I've been working on an async i/o mpm for Windows using IO completion
>> ports.
>>
>> I used the current winnt mpm as a starting point but I rather have it
>> in it's own dll instead of linked directly in
Hmmm... I'm thinking that in between UseCanonicalName On [look up our
name and use that] v.s. UseCanonicalName Off [trust the client] ...
we might want UseCanonicalName Port which would not do the DNS
lookups [trust the client for that] but would trust our idea of the port.
Respectable idea?
Bill
At 07:32 AM 11/26/2002, Francis Daly wrote:
>I'm not sure if this should go to dev or docs, but I'll try here as I
>suspect that it is due to a recent change by someone here. Sorry if
>I've got this bit wrong.
I'm cc'ing docs
>The web page returned from http://httpd.apache.org/dev/ looks
>strang
At 10:13 AM 11/26/2002, Joshua Slive wrote:
>On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
>
>> Folks, given that httpd is "mirrored worldwide" and not all mirrors are
>> actually rsyincing the ".old" directory (or anything that starts with a .
>> for what that matters), can you change the link in "
At 10:14 AM 11/26/2002, Aaron Bannert wrote:
>Oh, and for the record, moving files into .old/ directories is
>evil for rsync. :) (This isn't directed at Pier) Moving files
>around causes rsync to do a delete and then re-download the
>moved files/directories.
So you suggest initially populating old
At 11:19 AM 11/26/2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>That's my doing, certainly. Docs folks, would someone do the 'regen'
>magic to the xdocs/dev/ sources to regenerate docs/dev/ ? I brought
>the xdocs up to date yesterday after Justin pointed it out.
Thanks to Andre for taking this!
Bill
Francis, to the extent you don't want to reinvent the wheel;
http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs/apache-1.3/src/modules/standard/mod_autoindex.c
should help you find that patch. Because 2.0 split before the feature
was added, we 'missed' the new feature.
At 11:02 AM 11/27/2002, Francis Daly wrote:
>O
At 03:25 AM 11/28/2002, Francis Daly wrote:
>On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 11:29:36AM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>> Francis, to the extent you don't want to reinvent the wheel;
>>
>> http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs/apache-1.3/src/modules/standard/mod_autoindex.c
>&g
At 12:25 PM 11/30/2002, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>--On Saturday, November 30, 2002 6:01 PM + [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>wrowe 2002/11/30 10:01:00
>>
>> Removed: server Tag: APACHE_2_0_BRANCH provider.c
>> Log:
>>Thought this was done in the previous commit. All aaa overhaul
Good change.
Please commit back to 2_0_BRANCH.
[Look ma, no tags on include/ap_provider.h!]
Since we have never released this API, we should be able to avoid
the evil mmn bump.
Bill
At 12:48 PM 11/30/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>jerenkrantz2002/11/30 10:48:41
>
> Modified:include
ldap_url_parse() fn. However, I'm very concerned about
our proliferating namespace conflicts, so I chose another name while I was
hacking this together.
Anyway, patch attached, NT/2k/XP users please experiment and provide
feedback... thanks!
Bill
>From: "William A. Rowe, Jr.&qu
At 06:47 AM 12/2/2002, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>> wsanchez2002/11/29 03:05:59
>>
>> Modified:.Tag: APACHE_2_0_BRANCH CHANGES acinclude.m4
>> buildconf configure.in
>>buildTag: APACHE_2_0_BRANCH binbuild.sh
>>
At 11:27 AM 12/2/2002, Brad Nicholes wrote:
>Any reason why the changes to the following source file should not be added to the
>2.0.44 branch?
>
>modules/experimental/util_ldap.c
That patch looks good... committed.
>modules/experimental/util_ldap.dsp
And this patch was very bad. Already rever
/experimental/mod_auth_ldap before we come to the usual
consensus on how to deal with this platform :-)
Patches attached.
Bill
At 05:59 PM 12/1/2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>Attached is the patch for Win32 apr-util support with their build in library.
>
>It is included by default w
At 11:24 PM 12/2/2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>Patches attached.
Well... best of intentions... here are corrected patches - the httpd
patch was most borked, both with respect to util_ldap.dsp and my
most recent changes to Apache.dsw. Sorry... try these, win32
hackers.
Bill
In
I *can't* win for losing. Correct win32_auth_ldap.patch - finally.
At 11:24 PM 12/2/2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>Patches attached.
Well... best of intentions... here are corrected patches - the httpd
patch was most borked, both with respect to util_ldap.dsp and my
most recent ch
At 10:34 AM 12/3/2002, Brad Nicholes wrote:
>As far as the APU->APR changes go on NetWare, the net result is the same for us.
>Since we don't have autoconf on NetWare, this requires us to have our own version of
>apr_ldap.h (ie. apr_ldap.hnw) just like the Windows platform. But unlike Windows a
At 12:35 PM 12/3/2002, Andre Schild wrote:
>Under win32 there is no guarantee that a ldap library is available.
>For compiling/linking the apache with ldap support under win32
>you will need a third party ldap library.
Or Microsofts'. Your point?
It's actually harmless [in Win32] to build util_
At 07:18 AM 12/4/2002, Colm MacCárthaigh wrote:
>> In the interest of tying up loose ends, I'm still concerned with your
>> observation that --disable-sendfile didn't do the right thing... did
>> you "make distclean" before re-configuring?
>
>The problem there was that --disable-sendfile isnt an o
At 03:42 PM 12/6/2002, Brad Nicholes wrote:
>This patch adds a new directive "AuthLDAPConvertFromLanguage" to mod_auth_ldap
>that allows the admin to either define a specific language when converting the user
>ID to UTF8 of try to derive the language from the header.
Ewww... charsets aren't
Presuming my apr-util/ldap changes took hold, and don't prove too
disruptive, I'll backport this to 2.0 once folks have a few days for
bugs to settle out.
As the module is experimental, I'd like to get the 'experiment' going
by distributing util_ldap/auth_ldap with future 2.0 releases.
Bill
At 1
At 11:46 AM 10/15/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
>The second is SSL upgrade. I have the patches, they haven't been
>committed yet. I have attached them at the bottom of this message. The
>reason they haven't been committed, is that I don't have a client to test
>them with, and I haven't h
At 10:15 AM 12/15/2002, Brian Pane wrote:
>For now, I'll add a check to mod_mime to keep it from
>segfaulting.
>
>Perhaps we should also fix the root cause by either setting
>r->filename to "" instead of NULL in 2.x's directory_walk.
>I don't have a strong opinion on that part, though, so I'll
>def
From: "Aaron Bannert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 11:04 AM
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2001 at 11:50:27AM -0400, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> > > ServerName this.host.com [assumes the default port 80]
> >
> > except that Ryan said there is no default port any more.
>
>
> Make sure we run the new conf files through sed.
> Now, the question is whether it might make more sense to have them
> as ssl-std.conf, ldap-std.conf, and proxy-std.conf.
>
> (I'm also not sure if this is even shell portable or not.)
>
> I'll leave that up to OtherBill since he
From: "Justin Erenkrantz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 10:47 PM
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2001 at 10:40:20PM -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> > > Make sure we run the new conf files through sed.
> > > Now, the question is whether
From: "Greg Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 3:27 AM
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2001 at 08:40:38PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > wrowe 01/10/04 13:40:38
> >
> > Modified:docs/conf httpd-std.conf httpd-win.conf
> > Added: docs/conf ldap.conf proxy.conf s
From: "Justin Erenkrantz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 4:50 AM
> Ideally, we almost need another mode type that says, "I want you to
> block until the first packet received and then return that to me."
> This is along the lines of what Madhu was talking about earlier.
> An
From: "Jim Jagielski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 9:46 AM
> Jeff Trawick wrote:
> >
> > oh, darn! I see now that David's post was Wednesday but honestly it
> > just showed up in my in-box!!!
> >
>
> No problem! It just showed up in mine as well! No idea how OtherBill
>
Then this is broken on Win32 as well.
Looks like 1.3.21 must be tossed and this vetoed change modified
to reflect @@ServerRoot@@/htdocs/manual.
- Original Message -
From: "Brad Nicholes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 3:37 PM
Subject: 1.3.21
From: "Justin Erenkrantz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 7:47 PM
> On Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 05:34:41PM -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> > Aaron and I were chatting about this in stream-of-consiouness mode,
> > let me boil down our collectiv
From: "Roy T. Fielding" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 8:42 PM
> On Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 04:06:56PM -0700, Ian Holsman wrote:
> > hey guys.
> >
> > just got a simple question.
> >
> > What would the ramifications be if we changed the config options from
> > 'directory speci
From: "Cliff Woolley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 10:15 PM
> On Fri, 5 Oct 2001, Greg Stein wrote:
>
> > Um... gotta ask Ken about this. He vetoed a change in this area.
> >
> > If the change related to the veto hasn't been backed out, then we may have
> > to yank 1.3.21
From: "Greg Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 11:14 PM
> On Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 03:39:47PM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > On Friday 05 October 2001 03:34 pm, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> >
> > > And the more that I look at
From: "Dwayne Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 7:04 PM
> Just noticed that my build of recent tree is failing in the mod-ssl area
> because I don't have bison. Where would one get bison.exe for NT/2K?
Best site for all such things in _native_ form is
http://w
From: "Mladen Turk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 12:28 PM
> Sorry if I'm pain in the ass,
Not
> but...
> > From: William A. Rowe, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 9:13 PM
>
> > &g
From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 1:28 PM
> From: "Mladen Turk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 12:28 PM
>
> >
> > Didn't found something like the thing I h
From: "jlwpc1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 2:01 PM
.From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 3. 9x is gone.
>We will finally be able
> to tell users to got to XP (at least the home edition) - same cost as
>
From: "Greg Ames" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 8:39 PM
> I captured 3 dumps in /usr/local/apache2.0.26-debug/corefiles. All of
> them look pretty much the same. Here's the backtrace from one.
Fixed.
From: "Greg Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 7:18 AM
> I brought this up once before. I think it was Aaron that suggested an
> "optimization" which changed a pcalloc to a palloc. I noted that doing
> things like that are troublesome for long term maintenance.
>
> Bam. E
We have a issue on win32 (others?) at
the current moment.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: "Sebastian Bergmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 11:32 AM
Subject: Current CVS on Win32 and directory indexes
> Just noticed that Apache2, built
From: "Greg Ames" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 1:41 PM
> Well, I have good news and bad news.
... uh oh ...
> #0 0x280bb871 in apr_array_cat (dst=0x81d3494, src=0x0) at
> apr_tables.c:142
> #1 0x280bb9d6 in apr_array_append (p=0x81cd00c, first=0x8158b84,
> second=0x0)
>
> On Sat, Oct 20, 2001 at 06:29:09PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > wrowe 01/10/20 11:29:09
> >
> > Modified:server core.c
> > Log:
> > Canonicalize all absolute sections, not simply those that
> > fail to end in a '/'. Slash test is afterwords, once we've canonical
From: "Chuck Murcko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2001 2:32 PM
> On Saturday, October 20, 2001, at 01:02 PM, Daniel Lopez wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Oct 20, 2001 at 11:16:10AM +0200, Graham Leggett wrote:
> >> Daniel Lopez wrote:
> >>
> >>> I need an additional hook to process head
mod_rewrite.c:182
/* the cache */
static cache *cachep;
looks very, very evil on a threaded architecture.
That's interesting, since http://www.apache.org/docs/ returns
Moved Permanantly.
Looking at http://httpd.apache.org/docs/ which I believe you ment;
index.html.html bogusness has no associated charset, index.html.en
returns iso-8859-1, .ja.jis returns iso-2022-jp, and index.html.fr
returns no cha
From: "Marc Slemko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 2:06 PM
> On Sun, 21 Oct 2001, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
> > That's interesting, since http://www.apache.org/docs/ returns
> > Moved Permanantly.
> >
> > Which
From: "Rodent of Unusual Size" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 2:27 PM
> "William A. Rowe, Jr." wrote:
> >
> > Which directive did you expect to behave which way?
>
> Marc has already answered this.
Well, er, no. What &quo
From: "Greg Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 8:53 AM
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 04:36:46AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > wrowe 01/10/21 21:36:46
> >
> > Modified:server core.c
> > Log:
> > Fix two typos in the last patch... compiles/tests clean.
From: "Greg Ames" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 4:12 PM
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > wrowe 01/10/21 21:36:46
> >
> > Modified:server core.c
> > Log:
> > Fix two typos in the last patch... compiles/tests clean... Greg, please
> > run this again
From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 4:31 PM
> From: "Greg Ames" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 4:12 PM
>
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > wrowe
From: "Greg Ames" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 1:18 PM
> Looks good here too. We detect fatal child exits properly, and we get
> seg fault log messages. Log replay still runs cleanly on my ThinkPad.
>
> Why don't we re-tag after you commit?
Were you able to get a tra
From: "Joshua Slive" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 10:47 AM
> There are a couple configuration issues with httpd.apache.org/docs* at the
> moment:
>
> 1. We are back in "no acceptable variant" hell. I think OtherBill is still
> working on the directive to fix this, but
From: "Daniel Stone" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 3:20 AM
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 10:51:52PM -0400, Greg Ames wrote:
> > I'm happy to report that I switched us over to 2.0.27-dev on Tuesday,
> > 23-Oct-2001 18:24:58 PDT, and we're doing fine after an hour and a
> > hal
From: "Rodent of Unusual Size" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 9:56 AM
> "William A. Rowe, Jr." wrote:
> >
> > To be RFC compliant we must start by fixing today's wrong behavior.
> >
> > User accepts .en and .f
From: "Cliff Woolley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 11:08 AM
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, Sunitha Kumar wrote:
>
> > And, what are the tools that people have used for tracking leaks,
> > Efence, zmalloc, dmalloc, purify?
>
> Various people have used at least efence and purify,
From: "Ryan Bloom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 1:51 PM
> On Thursday 25 October 2001 08:52 pm, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > > It seems that there is a possibility for DoS on Apache servers
> > > when doing a POST. On search.apache.org, I can send the following
> > > request:
> >
From: "Rodent of Unusual Size" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 11:31 AM
> "William A. Rowe, Jr." wrote:
> >
> > > > User accepts no specified, we serve none [Also wrong,
> > > > also MULTIPLE_CHOICES should be
From: "Jon Travis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2001 1:24 AM
> Like I said in my follow up post to my original, you don't even
> need to post the data to actually have this occur. I telneted
> to the server, and let it sit there for like 47 minutes before
> I killed it. I ne
From: "Stipe Tolj" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2001 7:06 PM
> this problem is Cygwin 1.x specific, but I'm ask the list for a hint
> on where I can start figuring out what we have here:
>
> On the Cygwin 1.x platform (running both 1.1.8-2 and 1.3.3-2) I have
> the following
From: "Joshua Slive" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 9:20 AM
> Sorry, I don't have time to confirm this myself, but there seems to be a
> problem with the recent multiviews fix in 1.3.22:
>
> http://bugs.apache.org/index.cgi/full/8628
> http://bugs.apache.org/index.cgi/full/8
From: "Brian Behlendorf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 12:13 PM
Fixed, thanks.
I've committed Ralf's patch to ssl-std.conf, since we had 6 of 9 in favor
of a seperated config for ssl.
Y'r all welcome to jump in here, now that we have a good starting point.
Consistify, clarify, etc. I see already that some things such as the
mime types could just as simply go into mime.typ
From: "Jon Travis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 10:18 AM
> I'm checking my httpd.conf file to see if there is something weird
> there. I am indeed sending a valid GET with a huge content-length.
To which handler, may we ask? That might make a difference, thought it
sh
From: "Justin Erenkrantz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 10:20 AM
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2001 at 10:15:57AM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> > I thought we decided not to rely on -D SSL anymore, or am I mistaken?
> > If that 'feature&#x
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 12:21 PM
> aaron 01/10/31 10:21:53
>
> Modified:server core.c
> Log:
> Fix a big memory leak bug related to arbitrarily large header lines.
> The core input filter would happily consume all the data you gave it
>
From: "Ryan Bloom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 11:11 AM
> On Wednesday 31 October 2001 09:04 am, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 31, 2001 at 10:49:33AM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> > > OTOH, this doesn't work fo
From: "Justin Erenkrantz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 2:00 PM
> Yes, they are worthless because the core input filter has no way of
> knowing if it is working on a request, header, or body line.
It never needs to know.
> There is simply a call to ap_get_brigade wit
From: "Aaron Bannert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 2:54 PM
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2001 at 02:18:58PM -0600, William Rowe wrote:
> >
> > The most efficient model is for the consumer to keep calling the chain
> > until it has sufficient bytes for what it is trying to query [be
From: "Ryan Bloom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 1:20 PM
> On Saturday 03 November 2001 04:24 am, Mladen Turk wrote:
> >
> > I'm working on some module and found that my filter procedure gets executed
> > twice for each request.
> > I don't know if that's the bug, It's no
From: "Ian Holsman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 8:12 PM
> +1 for the concept
> If no one objects I'll integrate this.
> The reason I'm posting is that I remember Will Rowe had some issues
> With tables in the past, and I'm wanting to make sure he is OK with this
> .. Wi
From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 9:24 AM
> From: "Rodent of Unusual Size" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 10:11 AM
>
> > "Roy T. Fielding" wrote:
> >
From: "Greg Ames" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 10:15 AM
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > wrowe 01/11/09 00:08:43
> >
> > Modified:server request.c
> > Log:
> > Reintroduce the 'one stat dir_walk'
>
> Bill,
>
> How confident are you that this is ro
From: "Greg Ames" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 10:57 AM
>
> I'm in the middle of testing OtherBill's patch to reduce the number of
> stats. If it passes and he blesses it, I'd like to include this in
> 2_0_28. Let's see how that goes before I create new tarballs.
Greg, p
From: "Ryan Bloom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 11:22 AM
> On Friday 09 November 2001 05:24 am, Bill Stoddard wrote:
>
> Nope. I did that will OtherBill the day after the map_to_storage hook
> was added.
This looks like we've died in mod_mime or mod_mime_magic, since th
From: "Bill Stoddard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 10:42 AM
> FWIW, I see two stats rather than three to fetch c:/website/file500.html (an
>improvement).
>
> The first is:
> core_translate()
> apr_filepath_merge()
> apr_stat()
>
> The second is:
> core_map_to_storage()
Dirk, would you run this benchmark again against cvs HEAD so we can see the
impact of the 'one stat dir_walk' patch introduced today?
- Original Message -
From: "Dirk-Willem van Gulik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 1:31 PM
Subject: Re: [2.
From: "Brian Pane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 11:20 PM
> In mod_include, we use apr_pcalloc to create an include_ctx_t,
> which consists of about 80 bytes of integer and pointer fields
> and a pair of character buffers used to hold strings. Each
> of the character buffe
From: "Ryan Bloom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 12:38 PM
> On Saturday 10 November 2001 10:34 am, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> >
> > memset(f->ctx, 0, (size_t)((char *)&(ctx->error_str) - (char *)ctx));
>
> No offense, but that is an ugly line of code. :-)
Guys, look at th
From: "Chuck Murcko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 12:53 PM
> I've got 2.0.28 (the original tarball) running on OS X now. The regex
> warnings are not fatal but I need to dig in to that later:
Who plans on getting HFS right on OS X in apr/file_io/unix ??? That is
a rea
++1 on concept - this has irked me for some time now. mod_isapi, mod_includes
and a ton of other modules query a given variable, not the entire list... so
this idea makes much good sense :) Didn't have the brainpower/bandwidth to
absorb the actual patch this weekend, but I'm looking forward to
From: "Brian Pane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 1:21 AM
> William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
> >If one adds a module multiple times, (in this case, the silly user just
> >commented out the ClearModuleList) there is no warning whatsoever, y
From: "Mladen Turk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 11:39 AM
> Someone has the idea how to measure those precisely?
Are you testing loopback, or from another machine? Local testing is
generally faulty, and on Win32, it's doubly so (since there are a number
of framing issues
From: "Greg Ames" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 12:17 PM
> probably in a half an hour or so, on daedalus (so HP-UX will build).
Then I will follow with a zip file (including win32 .mak files).
> I find it annoying that OtherBill bumped some Win32 apr code into 2_0_28
> w
From: "Cliff Woolley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 1:46 PM
> On Mon, 12 Nov 2001, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
>
> > httpd-2.0/support/win32/.cvsignore includes "*.rc" as labelling
> > files to be ignored and not entered in CVS.
> >
> > Unfortunately, the repository cont
From: "Rodent of Unusual Size" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 3:06 PM
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > Drop the wide net observed by Ken Coar, since one .rc file does exist
> > in cvs (and should reside there.)
> > +ApacheMonitorVersion.rc
> > +wintty.rc
>
>
From: "Ryan Morgan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 4:29 PM
> It would be even better if ap_getline would return an apr_status_t rather
> than the number of bytes read. This would allow callers of ap_getline to
> detect errors like timeouts, etc from within ap_getline. Curr
Just chatted with Greg (his key is now signed on pgp.mit.edu), and I've renamed
the following to better get along with our mime-typing:
httpd-2_0_28-alpha.tar.gz.darwin[.asc] -> httpd-2_0_28-alpha-darwin.tar.gz[.asc]
Both Greg and I are curious, will OS X users really grok their build is darwi
From: "Ryan Morgan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 6:07 PM
> That's why I suggested adding an extra length parameter to ap_getline that
> gets modified to the length of the data read.. or am I missing something?
I missed that ... +1 on concept!
> IMO the current prototype
From: "Ryan Bloom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 8:55 PM
> The problem that remains is Windows. Windows starts the server, and creates
> one thread for each socket that is configured. That thread sits in accept, and
> passes the accepted socket to worker threads. This see
- Original Message -
From: "sterling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 12:59 AM
Subject: Re: 2_0_28 tarballs rolled and available
> Hi -
>
> I still have an outstanding bug (and patch) that hasn't gotten a response.
> I consider it a showstop
From: "Greg Ames" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 12:56 PM
> Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> >
> > I know that we can't touch the 2.0.28-alpha tarball, but I seem
> > to recall someone saying we could touch the next-level tarball
> > (i.e. -beta).
>
> h...that's an interest
From: "Greg Ames" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 1:06 PM
> Greg Ames wrote:
>
> > h...that's an interesting idea. I like it! I would bump the tag on
> > that file,
>
> crap... I just looked at viewcvs. There's been two other changes to
> that file since the tag,
601 - 700 of 6469 matches
Mail list logo
