gewe...@gmx.net wrote:
Hello,
I'm wondering if there is any follow-up to this issue. I'd love to try out
3.1's IPv6 feature.
Sorry, I suddenly got busy with family this weekend.
I'm planning on working on it sometime the next few days this week.
Amos
Original-Nachricht
Mark Nottingham wrote:
Unless I hear otherwise, I'm going to apply the patches attached to the
following bugs:
http://www.squid-cache.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=2631
response in bugzilla.
http://www.squid-cache.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=2632
IMO, this should be number of times squid tries
vollkom...@gmx.net wrote:
Sorry, third try...
Original-Nachricht
Hmm, I have a small suspicion... what happens if you change the top of
src/acl/Acl.cc
from:
#include config.h
to:
#include squid.h
or to:
#include include/config.h
Amos
--
Please be using
Current
Responses inline, and a couple more:
http://www.squid-cache.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=2642
http://www.squid-cache.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=2643
On 20/04/2009, at 4:46 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
Mark Nottingham wrote:
Unless I hear otherwise, I'm going to apply the patches attached to
the
Responses inline, and a couple more:
http://www.squid-cache.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=2642
http://www.squid-cache.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=2643
On 20/04/2009, at 4:46 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
Mark Nottingham wrote:
Unless I hear otherwise, I'm going to apply the patches attached to
the
Responses inline, and a couple more:
http://www.squid-cache.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=2642
http://www.squid-cache.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=2643
On 20/04/2009, at 4:46 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
Mark Nottingham wrote:
Unless I hear otherwise, I'm going to apply the patches attached to
the
Yeah, this came up in another bug as well, don't remember where, but
really this whole section needs to be reworked pretty extensively;
this is just a way to fine-tune the current behaviour until we figure
out what the right thing to do should be (and I suspect that's not a
trivial task).
Responses inline, and a couple more:
http://www.squid-cache.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=2642
I can't tell from the patch which one is being remove.
+1 if its the one directly in mainReconfigure()
peerMonitorInit() should probably check for duplicate calls somehow too.
But this is good for a
On 21/04/2009, at 1:24 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
Responses inline, and a couple more:
http://www.squid-cache.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=2642
I can't tell from the patch which one is being remove.
+1 if its the one directly in mainReconfigure()
Yep.
peerMonitorInit() should probably
Attached please find the new make outut, after:
# patch -p0 macosx_fatal_fails_mk2.patch
patching file compat/compat_shared.h
patching file include/config.h
patching file include/fatal.h
Here're the ./configure options I used:
./configure \
--build=i686-apple-darwin \
Yeah, this came up in another bug as well, don't remember where, but
really this whole section needs to be reworked pretty extensively;
this is just a way to fine-tune the current behaviour until we figure
out what the right thing to do should be (and I suspect that's not a
trivial task).
Hi everyone,
I'd like to introduce myself to the dev team and start helping out.
My name is Alistair Reay and I'm a system engineer at a large New
Zealand broadcaster that uses Squid and other open-source software
extensively. Using squid we've built the nations largest and cheapest
commercial
Hi!
Take a look at stale-while-revalidate (cache_peer option in 2.7); it
may do what you need.
Cheers,
On 21/04/2009, at 2:10 PM, Alistair Reay wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'd like to introduce myself to the dev team and start helping out.
My name is Alistair Reay and I'm a system engineer at
13 matches
Mail list logo
