Re: [squid-users] Error making squid-3.1.0.7-20090412 on Mac OS X 10.4

2009-05-04 Thread Amos Jeffries
Amos Jeffries wrote: Found It! grr... src/acl/Time.h Your filesystem appears to be case-insensitive. We already worked out what the fix should be since its needed elsewhere for future changes. I'm testing to see what the effect is on current code and will commit ASAP. Amos Okay. The

Intoductions

2009-05-04 Thread Chris Woodfield
Hi, Sending the obligatory introduction message...I'm using squid in a commercial CDN environment, and as such am primarily interested in working to add features to squid for this purpose in reverse proxy mode. We're on the 2.x train. More specifically, some of the hot points from my

[PATCH] Cache-Control overwriting hack

2009-05-04 Thread Chris Woodfield
Hi, This is a patch of probably limited utility, but I'll send it out anyway and leave it for you folks to decide :) It was written against 2.7STABLE6 but patches cleanly into HEAD. The purpose of this patch is to support the use of an alternate Cache-Control header in reverse-proxy

Re: [PATCH] Cache-Control overwriting hack

2009-05-04 Thread Bundle Buggy
Bundle Buggy has detected this merge request. For details, see: http://bundlebuggy.aaronbentley.com/project/squid/request/%3CE8FE3C35-0CBA-4272-9194-DEF885267638%40semihuman.com%3E Project: Squid

Re: Status of Squid 3 on Windows

2009-05-04 Thread Guido Serassio
Hi Alex, Il 02.13 04/05/2009 Alex Rousskov ha scritto: Hi Guido, Thanks a lot for the update. It is sad to see the results of many years of work dissipating and I sympathize with your situation. I wonder whether the demand for Squid on Windows is just not there OR it is the current lack of

Re: Intoductions

2009-05-04 Thread Alex Rousskov
On 05/04/2009 08:31 AM, Chris Woodfield wrote: Sending the obligatory introduction message...I'm using squid in a commercial CDN environment, and as such am primarily interested in working to add features to squid for this purpose in reverse proxy mode. We're on the 2.x train. More

Re: [PATCH] Cache-Control overwriting hack

2009-05-04 Thread Amos Jeffries
Hi, This is a patch of probably limited utility, but I'll send it out anyway and leave it for you folks to decide :) It was written against 2.7STABLE6 but patches cleanly into HEAD. The purpose of this patch is to support the use of an alternate Cache-Control header in reverse-proxy

Re: [PATCH] Cache-Control overwriting hack

2009-05-04 Thread Robert Collins
surrogate-control is an existing, defined header that should do this cleanly, and squid-3 already supports. -Rob signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [PATCH] Cache-Control overwriting hack

2009-05-04 Thread Chris Woodfield
My reading of header_replace only allows replacing header text with a fixed string, not any sort of dynamic text. The use case is where one wants this particular Squid instance to use a set of Cache-Control headers that are explicitly hidden from downstream caches as well as downstream

Re: [PATCH] Cache-Control overwriting hack

2009-05-04 Thread Mark Nottingham
Yeah, but if I had a do-over, I'd make it simpler. This is *much* simpler... On 05/05/2009, at 9:46 AM, Robert Collins wrote: surrogate-control is an existing, defined header that should do this cleanly, and squid-3 already supports. -Rob -- Mark Nottingham m...@yahoo-inc.com

Re: [PATCH] Cache-Control overwriting hack

2009-05-04 Thread Robert Collins
On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 11:57 +1000, Mark Nottingham wrote: Yeah, but if I had a do-over, I'd make it simpler. This is *much* simpler... I think you are entitled to that... but is it needed? -Rob signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [PATCH] Cache-Control overwriting hack

2009-05-04 Thread Mark Nottingham
The functionality? Very much so; I've been thinking about adding this sort of thing for a while. Very useful if you're running an accelerator. On 05/05/2009, at 12:12 PM, Robert Collins wrote: On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 11:57 +1000, Mark Nottingham wrote: Yeah, but if I had a do-over, I'd make

Re: [PATCH] Cache-Control overwriting hack

2009-05-04 Thread Robert Collins
On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 12:17 +1000, Mark Nottingham wrote: The functionality? Very much so; I've been thinking about adding this sort of thing for a while. Very useful if you're running an accelerator. No, a rewrite of the approach - seems to me that a functional version many things support a