delay pools statistics + delayed ACL completed

2008-04-06 Thread Adrian Chadd
I've just committed the statistics + delayed ACL stuff to Squid-2. Next: client-side delay pools ACL code. I'll create a new SF branch for that. Adrian -- - Xenion - http://www.xenion.com.au/ - VPS Hosting - Commercial Squid Support - - $25/pm entry-level VPSes w/ capped bandwidth charges

bzr error on Windows

2008-04-06 Thread Guido Serassio
Hi, I'm trying to checkout trunk on Windows following http://wiki.squid-cache.org/Squid3VCS, but I get the following error: C:\workbzr cbranch --lightweight bzr+ssh://squid-cache.org/bzr/squid3/trunk HEAD-3 command-line: line 0: Bad configuration option: ClearAllForwardings bzr: ERROR:

Re: Trying to start using bzr

2008-04-06 Thread Guido Serassio
Hi Henrik, Finally I have found some time to continue my bootstrap with bzr. At 20:43 31/03/2008, Henrik Nordstrom wrote: Your SQUID_NT_3_0 branch is /bzr/squid3/branches/SQUID_NT_3_0 But I have to ask Robert how we best continue the merge process on that branch.. I suspect it would

Re: [MERGE] Support large response headers

2008-04-06 Thread Alex Rousskov
On Sun, 2008-04-06 at 03:40 +0200, Henrik Nordstrom wrote: Resubmissions as I haven't received any comments on the previous merge request. This patch fixes Bug #2001 by reworking how the client_side_*.cc code deals with response headers. Instead of parsing the headers again it clones the

Re: bzr error on Windows

2008-04-06 Thread Alex Rousskov
On Sun, 2008-04-06 at 16:31 +0200, Guido Serassio wrote: Hi, I'm trying to checkout trunk on Windows following http://wiki.squid-cache.org/Squid3VCS, but I get the following error: C:\workbzr cbranch --lightweight bzr+ssh://squid-cache.org/bzr/squid3/trunk HEAD-3 command-line: line

Re: [MERGE] Support large response headers

2008-04-06 Thread Henrik Nordstrom
sön 2008-04-06 klockan 08:33 -0600 skrev Alex Rousskov: Why do we only clone replies and not requests? Can a request have a large header? Do we already deal with that without cloning? Requests is already referenced and cloned if needed only, and has been since many years back. For requests we

Re: Trying to start using bzr

2008-04-06 Thread Henrik Nordstrom
sön 2008-04-06 klockan 16:48 +0200 skrev Guido Serassio: My needs are: - A Windows specific development/stable branch based on the STABLE branch, so, now there is Which I question, but we had that discussion already. SQUID_NT_3_0 based on SQUID_3_0, likely in the future will be

Re: [MERGE] Support large response headers

2008-04-06 Thread Henrik Nordstrom
sön 2008-04-06 klockan 08:50 -0600 skrev Alex Rousskov: bb:comment Have you tested this with an ICAP server enabled? No. My ICAP setup is quite limited. Regards Henrik

Re: [MERGE] Support large response headers

2008-04-06 Thread Adrian Chadd
On Sun, Apr 06, 2008, Henrik Nordstrom wrote: Resubmissions as I haven't received any comments on the previous merge request. This patch fixes Bug #2001 by reworking how the client_side_*.cc code deals with response headers. Instead of parsing the headers again it clones the already parsed

Re: bzr error on Windows

2008-04-06 Thread Guido Serassio
Hi, At 18:15 06/04/2008, Guido Serassio wrote: I guess it uses whatever is the default in your ssh config unless you provide an username in the URL.. Try bzr+ssh://[EMAIL PROTECTED]/repo/branch Yes, it works. Thanks. But there is a very big problem: On Windows the files downloaded by bzr

Re: [MERGE-3.0] Support large response headers

2008-04-06 Thread Alex Rousskov
On Sun, 2008-04-06 at 02:41 +0200, Henrik Nordstrom wrote: Updated 3.0 patch. Had forgot to merge one related changeset from trunk adding MemBuf::size(size). Have you tested this with an ICAP server enabled? No. My ICAP setup is quite limited. bb:reject Placing a _temporary_ hold until I

Re: Bug season

2008-04-06 Thread Alex Rousskov
On Sun, 2008-04-06 at 02:01 +1300, Amos Jeffries wrote: I'd like some input regarding whether to back-port the following changes: - testheaders.sh alterations (b8892 etc) We have two options here. First is the entire change, .sh script and all. Second is to just port the code

Re: Trying to start using bzr

2008-04-06 Thread Guido Serassio
Hi Henrik, At 17:56 06/04/2008, Henrik Nordstrom wrote: What is the better solution ? My vote is that you create a new private branch from 3.0 for fixing Windows specific issues, apply the latest NT patch there and select a suitable location to publish the tree at. Suggested hosts are -

Re: [MERGE-3.0] Support large response headers

2008-04-06 Thread Tsantilas Christos
I will do some tests. Henrik are you still using the bzr tree here: http://www.henriknordstrom.net/bzr/squid3/hno/largeresp/ Regards, Christos Alex Rousskov wrote: On Sun, 2008-04-06 at 02:41 +0200, Henrik Nordstrom wrote: Updated 3.0 patch. Had forgot to merge one related changeset from

Re: [MERGE-3.0] Support large response headers

2008-04-06 Thread Alex Rousskov
On Sun, 2008-04-06 at 20:00 +0300, Tsantilas Christos wrote: I will do some tests. Thank you! Alex. Alex Rousskov wrote: On Sun, 2008-04-06 at 02:41 +0200, Henrik Nordstrom wrote: Updated 3.0 patch. Had forgot to merge one related changeset from trunk adding MemBuf::size(size).

Re: bzr error on Windows

2008-04-06 Thread Amos Jeffries
Henrik Nordstrom wrote: sön 2008-04-06 klockan 17:34 +0200 skrev Guido Serassio: Permission denied (publickey). bzr: ERROR: Connection closed: please check connectivity and permissions (and try -Dhpss if further diagnosis is required) I guess it uses whatever is the default in your ssh

Re: Trying to start using bzr

2008-04-06 Thread Henrik Nordstrom
sön 2008-04-06 klockan 18:44 +0200 skrev Guido Serassio: If I'm not wrong, the needed steps are listed in the Merge another branch into yours section. The SOURCE_OF_FOO branch must be already locally checked-out, right ? Not unless you want to.. but if you follow the instructions it will be.

Re: [MERGE-3.0] Support large response headers

2008-04-06 Thread Henrik Nordstrom
sön 2008-04-06 klockan 10:48 -0600 skrev Alex Rousskov: Placing a _temporary_ hold until I (or somebody) tests this with ICAP. If nobody can, I should be able to in a couple of days. We had quite a few bugs in 3.0 because of things being backported so let's try to be a little bit more careful

Re: [MERGE-3.0] Support large response headers

2008-04-06 Thread Henrik Nordstrom
sön 2008-04-06 klockan 20:00 +0300 skrev Tsantilas Christos: I will do some tests. Henrik are you still using the bzr tree here: http://www.henriknordstrom.net/bzr/squid3/hno/largeresp/ Yes. It's up to date. And so is the largeresp-3.0 branch at the same location with the 3.0 backport. bzr

Re: [MERGE] Support large response headers

2008-04-06 Thread Henrik Nordstrom
mån 2008-04-07 klockan 01:07 +0800 skrev Adrian Chadd: As discussed on IRC, I'm not sure where in 2.5/2.6 the response status/headers are allowed to grow past 4k _AND_ be parsed. From what it seems it's not... 2.7 (and 3 with the submitted patch) behaves better there.. only having problems on

Re: bzr error on Windows

2008-04-06 Thread Henrik Nordstrom
sön 2008-04-06 klockan 18:15 +0200 skrev Guido Serassio: Try bzr+ssh://[EMAIL PROTECTED]/repo/branch Yes, it works. I think that this should be in http://wiki.squid-cache.org/Squid3VCS. Agreed. The whoami bzr command could be a little confusing about this. I see how one comes to that

Re: [MERGE-3.0] Support large response headers

2008-04-06 Thread Alex Rousskov
On Mon, 2008-04-07 at 01:23 +0200, Henrik Nordstrom wrote: sön 2008-04-06 klockan 10:48 -0600 skrev Alex Rousskov: Placing a _temporary_ hold until I (or somebody) tests this with ICAP. If nobody can, I should be able to in a couple of days. We had quite a few bugs in 3.0 because of

Re: Trying to start using bzr

2008-04-06 Thread Kinkie
Actually when thinking of it I think we should provide an rsync source for current Squid sources.. Done. rsync://squid-cache.org/source/squid-version where version is one of 3, 3.0, 2, 2.7, 2.6 I've added documentation for this on the wiki in DeveloperResources. -- /kinkie

Re: [MERGE] Support large response headers

2008-04-06 Thread Adrian Chadd
On Mon, Apr 07, 2008, Henrik Nordstrom wrote: m??n 2008-04-07 klockan 01:07 +0800 skrev Adrian Chadd: As discussed on IRC, I'm not sure where in 2.5/2.6 the response status/headers are allowed to grow past 4k _AND_ be parsed. From what it seems it's not... 2.7 (and 3 with the