You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net> on 2009/05/29 10:14:10 UTC
[VOTE] release httpd mod_ftp-0.9.3 beta?
mod_ftp fans;
We seem to have identified and solved our remaining 0.9.2 beta issues,
so it's time for another, perhaps the final try on the way to GA!
Please fetch up the newly prepared mod_ftp-0.9.3.tar.gz (available
now), or the win32/netware/os2 suitable package mod_ftp-0.9.3-crlf.zip
(still needs to sync in the next hour) from:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/mod_ftp/
review, take it for a spin, and cast your choice
[ ] -1 for any release of 0.9.3 (regressed from 0.9.2?)
[ ] +1 to release as 0.9.3-beta
[ ] +1 to release as 0.9.3-beta, and ready to tag GA (1.0.0)
Please let us know if you test the two significant issues;
CURRENT RELEASE NOTES:
* EPSV and EPRT need real world testing for different routing and DMZ
cases and validating a range of IPv6-enabled clients' interop.
Note many IPv4-only NAT routers appear to ignore EPRT commands,
even as they would fix up NAT addresses from PORT commands.
* Extra attention should be paid to PORT and EPRT connections, especially
when assigned low numbered ports, e.g. FTPActiveRange 20
These are my only hesitations in blessing the release 1.0.0 just yet.
Please be brutal in respect to testing both aspects :)
For getting started,
http://httpd.apache.org/mod_ftp/
and
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/mod_ftp/tags/0.9.3/README-FTP
Bill
Re: [VOTE] release httpd mod_ftp-0.9.3 beta?
Posted by Guenter Knauf <fu...@apache.org>.
Bill,
William A. Rowe, Jr. schrieb:
>> reverted.
>
> Thanks; something aught to be said under a Netware heading of README-FTP,
> if you can whip up a paragraph or two?
hmmm, honestly spoken I dont know how to so.
The problem is that its not possible to do an easy in-tree build since
that would require a lot of changes, and should be only done by someone
whoe's really familar with the current NetWare build system. I could now
continue to explain why this is as it is, and what's wrong with the
build system, but in order to make it better I would finally end up with
rewriting it completely. When I talked to Brad about this years ago we
both came to the conclusion that we should focus on making configure
working to do a cross compile, but as I have just mentioned with APR
even MingW32 which has far more complete and for other projects fully
working cross compiler it still doesnt work, and since I am far away
from being an configure expert I see no way to fix these things without
someone's help; so we have to stay with the NetWare build system as is
for now.
Also there's zero benefit in trying to do so - the simplest way would be
to compile it out-tree as spearate module, and the final results are
that it previously with NWGNUmakefile nicely integrated and added all
files to the main dist direcory where they should go.
I have a batch file in the root of httpd-2.x.y which sets all needed env
vars to SDKs, APR, APU and httpd root and finally calls 'make -f
NWGNUmakefile' which then builds httpd + apr + apu.
If I sit in the root dir of mod_ftp and provided that NWGNUftp-makefile
is renamed to NWGNUmakefile then I only need to call this same batch
file with full path, and mod_ftp builds nicely, and same batch with
'install' parameter does copy over everything like fixed conf, docs,
module to the main httpd dist dir to the right folders.
That's the simplest way it can go, and 100% same as compiling httpd self
which is anyway the first required step in order to get the other
processed files like apr|apu.h etc.
Günter.
Re: [VOTE] release httpd mod_ftp-0.9.3 beta?
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Guenter Knauf wrote:
> Bill,
> William A. Rowe, Jr. schrieb:
>> With this fixed; and hopefully a resolution to the issue I had raised
>> with Guenter r.e. file overwriting
> reverted.
Thanks; something aught to be said under a Netware heading of README-FTP,
if you can whip up a paragraph or two?
>> "this looks like 1.0.0" release.
> the 2.2.x authn_anon module seems to lack of the
> 'Anonymous_Authoritative' directive which makes the sample config break.
> I would suggest that we comment this out.
+1, feel free to patch.
Re: [VOTE] release httpd mod_ftp-0.9.3 beta?
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Guenter Knauf wrote:
> Bill,
> William A. Rowe, Jr. schrieb:
>> With this fixed; and hopefully a resolution to the issue I had raised
>> with Guenter r.e. file overwriting
> reverted.
Thanks; something aught to be said under a Netware heading of README-FTP,
if you can whip up a paragraph or two?
>> "this looks like 1.0.0" release.
> the 2.2.x authn_anon module seems to lack of the
> 'Anonymous_Authoritative' directive which makes the sample config break.
> I would suggest that we comment this out.
+1, feel free to patch.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] release httpd mod_ftp-0.9.3 beta?
Posted by Guenter Knauf <fu...@apache.org>.
Bill,
William A. Rowe, Jr. schrieb:
> With this fixed; and hopefully a resolution to the issue I had raised
> with Guenter r.e. file overwriting
reverted.
> "this looks like 1.0.0" release.
the 2.2.x authn_anon module seems to lack of the
'Anonymous_Authoritative' directive which makes the sample config break.
I would suggest that we comment this out.
Günter.
Re: [VOTE] release httpd mod_ftp-0.9.3 beta?
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
> [X] -1 for any release of 0.9.3 (regressed from 0.9.2?)
It's not a regression, but I'm trying to correct the fact that normal
disconnects, al la
>>> QUIT
<<< 221 Goodbye.
result in half closed sockets. The data connections both passive and
active are correctly closed, and lie in TIME_WAIT for a bit, but these
control connections are sitting at;
tcp 1 0 ::1:21 ::1:46180 CLOSE_WAIT
tcp 0 0 ::1:46180 ::1:21 FIN_WAIT2
not looking good. But reviewing the code, I don't see the flaw, so
I'll end up spending tracing time on this to work out why we hadn't
correctly invoked apr_lingering_close. Bother.
With this fixed; and hopefully a resolution to the issue I had raised
with Guenter r.e. file overwriting, and the issue I raised about the
oddness with FNM_PERIOD matching, I really think we are ready for the
"this looks like 1.0.0" release.
Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] release httpd mod_ftp-0.9.3 beta?
Posted by Guenter Knauf <fu...@apache.org>.
Hi Jorge,
Jorge Schrauwen schrieb:
> Didn't have much time to tinker with it being exams and all but it
> fails to build for me.
>
> I do what I always do untar, ./configure.apxs, make, (make install)
>
> Below you'll find the failed output. I'm not sure when I have time to
> look into it.
>
> But I guess some feedback is better than no feedback.
>
> Jorge
can you please try if the below patch fixes the issue for you?
--- mod_ftp.h.orig Fri May 29 08:51:10 2009
+++ mod_ftp.h Fri May 29 22:19:10 2009
@@ -23,6 +23,8 @@
#ifndef MOD_FTP_H
#define MOD_FTP_H
+#define CORE_PRIVATE
+
#include "httpd.h"
#include "http_config.h"
Günter.
Re: [VOTE] release httpd mod_ftp-0.9.3 beta?
Posted by Jorge Schrauwen <jo...@gmail.com>.
That would do just fine.
Maybe worth documentation somewhere.
Honestly it was a oh that would be usefull for a lot of users kind of
idea that I didn't spend time researching much.
Are there actually any user statistics for mod_ftp?
~Jorge
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 8:04 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
<wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> Jorge Schrauwen wrote:
>> Trunk builds fine now.
>>
>> Just something that I noticed.
>> when the user@domainX is used and domainX doesn't exist it will
>> default to the default vhost.
>>
>> could it be possible to make that configurable to say go to default or
>> deny connection?
>
> I don't want to solve in code what the code already solves.
>
> What about, in the default ftp vhost, using the VirtualHostByUser,
> configure for basic auth with an empty user list (or for your
> convenience you could have an admin here). Require valid-user at
> <Location /> and we should be done.
>
> In the named hosts, using VirtualHostByUser plus optionally the
> StripHostname feature, set the appropriate access control.
>
> How would that do for solving the puzzle?
>
Re: [VOTE] release httpd mod_ftp-0.9.3 beta?
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Jorge Schrauwen wrote:
> Trunk builds fine now.
>
> Just something that I noticed.
> when the user@domainX is used and domainX doesn't exist it will
> default to the default vhost.
>
> could it be possible to make that configurable to say go to default or
> deny connection?
I don't want to solve in code what the code already solves.
What about, in the default ftp vhost, using the VirtualHostByUser,
configure for basic auth with an empty user list (or for your
convenience you could have an admin here). Require valid-user at
<Location /> and we should be done.
In the named hosts, using VirtualHostByUser plus optionally the
StripHostname feature, set the appropriate access control.
How would that do for solving the puzzle?
Re: [VOTE] release httpd mod_ftp-0.9.3 beta?
Posted by Jorge Schrauwen <jo...@gmail.com>.
Trunk builds fine now.
Just something that I noticed.
when the user@domainX is used and domainX doesn't exist it will
default to the default vhost.
could it be possible to make that configurable to say go to default or
deny connection?
~Jorge
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 10:58 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
<wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> Guenter Knauf wrote:
>> William A. Rowe, Jr. schrieb:
>>
>>> Are you certain NetWare should be building the ftp_lowportd.c? (It can,
>> no, it cant. How can we workaround this?
>>
>>> it seems that sys/un.h is found for unix pipe support).
>> argh! That's the reason why the APR_HAS_ is defined!
>
> I see no related APR_HAS_
>
> Have worked around this, testing explicitly for one of the variants of
> socket passing msghdr support. (Actually, someone who cares about the
> mod_proxy_fdpass should really borrow this code).
>
> Fixed several other [miss-]detections, give this another shot.
>
Re: [VOTE] release httpd mod_ftp-0.9.3 beta?
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Guenter Knauf wrote:
> William A. Rowe, Jr. schrieb:
>
>> Are you certain NetWare should be building the ftp_lowportd.c? (It can,
> no, it cant. How can we workaround this?
>
>> it seems that sys/un.h is found for unix pipe support).
> argh! That's the reason why the APR_HAS_ is defined!
I see no related APR_HAS_
Have worked around this, testing explicitly for one of the variants of
socket passing msghdr support. (Actually, someone who cares about the
mod_proxy_fdpass should really borrow this code).
Fixed several other [miss-]detections, give this another shot.
Re: [VOTE] release httpd mod_ftp-0.9.3 beta?
Posted by Guenter Knauf <fu...@apache.org>.
Hi,
William A. Rowe, Jr. schrieb:
> What was missing for 2.2? CORE_PRIVATE.
yes.
> Are you certain NetWare should be building the ftp_lowportd.c? (It can,
no, it cant. How can we workaround this?
> it seems that sys/un.h is found for unix pipe support).
argh! That's the reason why the APR_HAS_ is defined!
> Can NetWare run mod_cgid, today? If so, we should be good.
nope, we have no unix sockets on NW.
had some friday evening friends, so have not looked deeper, but will
tomorrow fetch trunk and check further.
thanks, Gün.
Re: [VOTE] release httpd mod_ftp-0.9.3 beta?
Posted by Jorge Schrauwen <jo...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 12:06 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
<wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> Jorge Schrauwen wrote:
>>
>> I'm not saying we shouldn't make it easy to provide and alternative
>> path for apxs it being a little config mod or be it a parameter.
>
> Neither was I :) As Guenter pointed out, distros were "forced" to rename
> apxs to apxs2 because we failed to do so. But what about the distinction
> between apxs2 and apxs22? Or some apxs24 or apxs3 in the future?
>
> We should help people in this, but without distributors coming back and
> hollering "whoa! problem!" how do they expect to provide us with some
> standardized solution? So they each invent their own, and then gripe
> when accommodating each of their their forks is rejected by the project?
>
> Guenter - your first challenge on httpd trunk is to convince the project
> that /usr/bin/apxs for 2.4/3.0 would be a stupid mistake to repeat, so
> that we change our ways :) If your proposal involves naming it apxs2 or
> apxs3, then you might kill two birds in one stone.
>
Personally I'd go for renaming (backwards aswel to
apxs13
apxs20
apxs22
apxs30
...
and having apxs being a symlink of sorts
like "apxs -s 22" will set 22 as the default but also providing na one
time overwrite
something like apxs -v 22 will use it only for this runtime instance.
Not ideal but it does provide a long term solution but probably not ideal.
Re: [VOTE] release httpd mod_ftp-0.9.3 beta?
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Jorge Schrauwen wrote:
>
> I'm not saying we shouldn't make it easy to provide and alternative
> path for apxs it being a little config mod or be it a parameter.
Neither was I :) As Guenter pointed out, distros were "forced" to rename
apxs to apxs2 because we failed to do so. But what about the distinction
between apxs2 and apxs22? Or some apxs24 or apxs3 in the future?
We should help people in this, but without distributors coming back and
hollering "whoa! problem!" how do they expect to provide us with some
standardized solution? So they each invent their own, and then gripe
when accommodating each of their their forks is rejected by the project?
Guenter - your first challenge on httpd trunk is to convince the project
that /usr/bin/apxs for 2.4/3.0 would be a stupid mistake to repeat, so
that we change our ways :) If your proposal involves naming it apxs2 or
apxs3, then you might kill two birds in one stone.
Re: [VOTE] release httpd mod_ftp-0.9.3 beta?
Posted by Jorge Schrauwen <jo...@gmail.com>.
~Jorge
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 2:27 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
<wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> Guenter Knauf wrote:
>> Sure that its possible to specify the full path at commandline, but tell
>> me a reason why we should make it harder for users than needed?
>
> The question is; which forks are we accommodating? What scope? .1% of
> installed userbase? (whoops - better restore win9x quick!) Seriously,
> if someone is using the fork, and grabbing packages, they just grab the
> mod_ftp package, so no big deal.
>
> Totally cool with adding a note to README-FTP about the APXS=apxs2 trick
> for those affected.
>
I'm for this as well.
People using the modded distro packages will most likely also install
mod_ftp from that distro.
The people that use say a distro's 1.3 package or a alt vendor package
in combination with a manual compile/vanilla implementation will most
hopefully be smart enough to understand the little changes that are
needed.
Personally I think that if distro's want to modify httpd to fit their
needs it also their job to modify modules to work with there modified
version.
I'm not saying we shouldn't make it easy to provide and alternative
path for apxs it being a little config mod or be it a parameter.
> I'm not disagreeing that it's potentially stupid for us to ship 'apxs'.
> I'm disagreeing that the appropriate place to fix conventions is here.
> And if folks don't want to play in such an open ecosystem, there is next
> to nothing we are going to fix in this, but we don't have to become party
> to perpetuating it. Watching the good folks at users@, #httpd etc tear
> their hair out at vendor stupidity or cleverness is not 'fun'.
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] release httpd mod_ftp-0.9.3 beta?
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Guenter Knauf wrote:
> Sure that its possible to specify the full path at commandline, but tell
> me a reason why we should make it harder for users than needed?
The question is; which forks are we accommodating? What scope? .1% of
installed userbase? (whoops - better restore win9x quick!) Seriously,
if someone is using the fork, and grabbing packages, they just grab the
mod_ftp package, so no big deal.
Totally cool with adding a note to README-FTP about the APXS=apxs2 trick
for those affected.
I'm not disagreeing that it's potentially stupid for us to ship 'apxs'.
I'm disagreeing that the appropriate place to fix conventions is here.
And if folks don't want to play in such an open ecosystem, there is next
to nothing we are going to fix in this, but we don't have to become party
to perpetuating it. Watching the good folks at users@, #httpd etc tear
their hair out at vendor stupidity or cleverness is not 'fun'.
Re: [VOTE] release httpd mod_ftp-0.9.3 beta?
Posted by Guenter Knauf <fu...@apache.org>.
Bill,
William A. Rowe, Jr. schrieb:
> Zarro sympathy for the pain those distros cause to their users by forking
> around.
You're not thinking about users benefit here. If we can simplify things
for users with only a rename which costs us nothing I see no reason why
not doing so. The reason why distros renamed apxs from AP2 to apxs2 is
very simple: because they provide(d) both Apache13 and Apache2x.
I came self over boxes which had both Apache13 and Apache2x installed
(and there are valid reasons for such, f.e. because Oracle delivers an
AP13 modified beast with closed mods); the 'which' approach then finds
always the AP13 apxs. Anyway cant get why not looking for both
automatically? I used it, and that works fine - first look for apxs2,
and second for apxs, and then apxs2 is used if found.
Sure that its possible to specify the full path at commandline, but tell
me a reason why we should make it harder for users than needed?
just my 2ct.
Gün.
Re: [VOTE] release httpd mod_ftp-0.9.3 beta?
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Guenter Knauf wrote:
> Hi Bill,
>
> William A. Rowe, Jr. schrieb:
>> Are you certain NetWare should be building the ftp_lowportd.c? (It can,
> the error I posted wasnt from NetWare but from SuSE Linux 10.3 / AP
> 2.2.11, and seems that for whatever reason there's mpm.h missing with
> the SuSE apache2-devel package.
Bugger; we'll have to see what we can do, but it was there for cause.
> BTW. do you agree that we look in configure.apxs first for apxs2 and
> then for apxs?
-1; APXS=apxs2 ./configure.apxs is a quick and simple workaround.
> Many distros seem to rename the apxs for Apache 2.x (BTW.
> its probably a good idea that we do that too already in sources - then
> we would find this equal over all distros).
Yup, and many distros do many forked up things that we don't need to bother
with, just as long as there is a trivial workaround, as above.
Zarro sympathy for the pain those distros cause to their users by forking
around.
Re: [VOTE] release httpd mod_ftp-0.9.3 beta?
Posted by Guenter Knauf <fu...@apache.org>.
Hi Bill,
William A. Rowe, Jr. schrieb:
> Are you certain NetWare should be building the ftp_lowportd.c? (It can,
the error I posted wasnt from NetWare but from SuSE Linux 10.3 / AP
2.2.11, and seems that for whatever reason there's mpm.h missing with
the SuSE apache2-devel package.
BTW. do you agree that we look in configure.apxs first for apxs2 and
then for apxs? Many distros seem to rename the apxs for Apache 2.x (BTW.
its probably a good idea that we do that too already in sources - then
we would find this equal over all distros).
Gün.
Re: [VOTE] release httpd mod_ftp-0.9.3 beta?
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Guenter Knauf wrote:
> Hi,
> Jorge Schrauwen schrieb:
>> ftp_commands.c: In function ‘ftp_cmd_pass’:
>> ftp_commands.c:1080: error: ‘ap_loaded_modules’ undeclared (first use
>> in this function)
>> ftp_commands.c:1080: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
>> ftp_commands.c:1080: error: for each function it appears in.)
>> ftp_commands.c:1083: error: ‘ap_top_module’ undeclared (first use in
>> this function)
>> make[1]: *** [ftp_commands.slo] Error 1
>> make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
>> make[1]: Leaving directory `/srv/.src/modules/mod_ftp/modules/ftp'
>> make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
>> ---
> strange; I get exactly same error for NetWare platfrom, and cant figure
> out why this happens - these are defined in httpd_config.h which gets
> included via mod_ftp.h from what I see ...
>
> ftp_lowportd.c:401: error: ‘ap_server_conf’ undeclared (first use in
> this function)
> ftp_lowportd.c:520: error: ‘ap_server_conf’ undeclared (first use in
> this function)
> need to dig some further why these all happen ...
No need; see trunk for the non-trunk compatible flavor; I will be rerolling.
Thanks to you both for testing.
What was missing for 2.2? CORE_PRIVATE.
A few other changes were required for 2.0/2.2. I'm working on the solaris,
ancient msg_accrights flavor of this.
Are you certain NetWare should be building the ftp_lowportd.c? (It can,
it seems that sys/un.h is found for unix pipe support). Can NetWare run
mod_cgid, today? If so, we should be good.
Re: [VOTE] release httpd mod_ftp-0.9.3 beta?
Posted by Guenter Knauf <fu...@apache.org>.
Hi,
Jorge Schrauwen schrieb:
> ftp_commands.c: In function ‘ftp_cmd_pass’:
> ftp_commands.c:1080: error: ‘ap_loaded_modules’ undeclared (first use
> in this function)
> ftp_commands.c:1080: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
> ftp_commands.c:1080: error: for each function it appears in.)
> ftp_commands.c:1083: error: ‘ap_top_module’ undeclared (first use in
> this function)
> make[1]: *** [ftp_commands.slo] Error 1
> make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> make[1]: Leaving directory `/srv/.src/modules/mod_ftp/modules/ftp'
> make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
> ---
strange; I get exactly same error for NetWare platfrom, and cant figure
out why this happens - these are defined in httpd_config.h which gets
included via mod_ftp.h from what I see ...
I've copied the declares from httpd_config.h into ftp_commands.c which
makes compilation pass this prob:
AP_DECLARE_DATA extern module **ap_loaded_modules;
AP_DECLARE_DATA extern module *ap_top_module;
but then next break happens in ftp_protcol.c with another missing define
from httpd.h:
Compiling ftp_protocol.c
### mwccnlm Compiler:
# File: ftp_protocol.c
# -----------------------
# 166: if (pe->length + len >
DEFAULT_LIMIT_REQUEST_LINE +
2) {
# Error:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
# undefined identifier 'DEFAULT_LIMIT_REQUEST_LINE'
### mwccnlm Compiler:
# 180: if (new_size >
DEFAULT_LIMIT_REQUEST_LINE + 2) {
# Error: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
# undefined identifier 'DEFAULT_LIMIT_REQUEST_LINE'
on my Linux SuSE 10.3 / httpd 2.2.11 I get:
/usr/lib/apr-1/build/libtool --silent --mode=compile gcc -pthread
-march=i586 -mtune=i686 -fmessage-length=0 -Wall -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2
-fstack-protector -O2 -g -fPIC -Wall -fno-strict-aliasing
-DLDAP_DEPRECATED -DFTP_APXS_BUILD -DLINUX=2 -D_REENTRANT -D_GNU_SOURCE
-D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -DSSL_EXPERIMENTAL_ENGINE
-DMAX_SERVER_LIMIT=200000 -DLDAP_DEPRECATED -DMAXLINE=4096
-I/temp/devel/mod_ftp/modules/ftp -I/temp/devel/mod_ftp/modules/ftp
-I/temp/devel/mod_ftp/include-I/usr/include/apache2 -I.
-I/usr/include/apr-1 -prefer-pic -c ftp_lowportd.c && touch ftp_lowportd.slo
ftp_lowportd.c:24:17: error: mpm.h: Datei oder Verzeichnis nicht gefunden
ftp_lowportd.c: In function ‘lowportd_server’:
ftp_lowportd.c:401: error: ‘ap_server_conf’ undeclared (first use in
this function)
ftp_lowportd.c:401: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
ftp_lowportd.c:401: error: for each function it appears in.)
ftp_lowportd.c: In function ‘lowportd_maint’:
ftp_lowportd.c:520: error: ‘ap_server_conf’ undeclared (first use in
this function)
make[2]: *** [ftp_lowportd.slo] Fehler 1
make[2]: Leaving directory `/temp/devel/mod_ftp/modules/ftp'
make[1]: *** [install-recursive] Fehler 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/temp/devel/mod_ftp/modules/ftp'
make: *** [install-recursive] Fehler 1
need to dig some further why these all happen ...
Günter.
Re: [VOTE] release httpd mod_ftp-0.9.3 beta?
Posted by Jorge Schrauwen <jo...@gmail.com>.
Didn't have much time to tinker with it being exams and all but it
fails to build for me.
I do what I always do untar, ./configure.apxs, make, (make install)
Below you'll find the failed output. I'm not sure when I have time to
look into it.
But I guess some feedback is better than no feedback.
Jorge
---
shirayuki mod_ftp # ./configure.apxs
Configuring mod_ftp for APXS in /srv/httpd/bin/apxs
rm -f *.o *.lo *.slo *.obj *.a *.la conftest_fchmod.c
conftest_arpa_ftp_h.c conftest_netinet_ip_h.c *.loT conftest_fchmod
conftest_arpa_ftp_h conftest_netinet_ip_h
rm -rf .libs
/srv/lib/build-1/libtool --silent --mode=compile gcc -g -O2 -pthread
-DLINUX=2 -D_REENTRANT -D_GNU_SOURCE -I/srv/httpd/include -I.
-I/srv/lib/include/apr-1 -I/srv/lib/include -prefer-non-pic -static
-c conftest_arpa_ftp_h.c && touch conftest_arpa_ftp_h.lo
rm -f *.o *.lo *.slo *.obj *.a *.la conftest_fchmod.c
conftest_arpa_ftp_h.c conftest_netinet_ip_h.c *.loT conftest_fchmod
conftest_arpa_ftp_h conftest_netinet_ip_h
rm -rf .libs
/srv/lib/build-1/libtool --silent --mode=compile gcc -g -O2 -pthread
-DLINUX=2 -D_REENTRANT -D_GNU_SOURCE -I/srv/httpd/include -I.
-I/srv/lib/include/apr-1 -I/srv/lib/include -prefer-non-pic -static
-c conftest_fchmod.c && touch conftest_fchmod.lo
/srv/lib/build-1/libtool --silent --mode=link gcc -g -O2 -pthread
-L/srv/lib/lib -o conftest_fchmod conftest_fchmod.lo
rm -f *.o *.lo *.slo *.obj *.a *.la conftest_fchmod.c
conftest_arpa_ftp_h.c conftest_netinet_ip_h.c *.loT conftest_fchmod
conftest_arpa_ftp_h conftest_netinet_ip_h
rm -rf .libs
/srv/lib/build-1/libtool --silent --mode=compile gcc -g -O2 -pthread
-DLINUX=2 -D_REENTRANT -D_GNU_SOURCE -I/srv/httpd/include -I.
-I/srv/lib/include/apr-1 -I/srv/lib/include -prefer-non-pic -static
-c conftest_netinet_ip_h.c && touch conftest_netinet_ip_h.lo
rm -f *.o *.lo *.slo *.obj *.a *.la conftest_fchmod.c
conftest_arpa_ftp_h.c conftest_netinet_ip_h.c *.loT conftest_fchmod
conftest_arpa_ftp_h conftest_netinet_ip_h
rm -rf .libs
rm -f .deps Makefile
Finished, run 'make' to compile mod_ftp
Run 'make FTPPORT=8021 install' to install mod_ftp
(The default FTPPORT is 21 if not specified)
The manual pages ftp/index.html and mod/mod_ftp.html
will be installed to help get you started.
The conf/extra/ftpd.conf will be installed as an example
for you to work from. In your configuration file,
/srv/httpd/conf/httpd.conf
uncomment the line '#Include conf/extra/ftpd.conf'
to activate this example mod_ftp configuration.
shirayuki mod_ftp # make
Making all in modules/ftp
make[1]: Entering directory `/srv/.src/modules/mod_ftp/modules/ftp'
/srv/lib/build-1/libtool --silent --mode=compile gcc -g -O2 -pthread
-DFTP_APXS_BUILD -DLINUX=2 -D_REENTRANT -D_GNU_SOURCE
-I/srv/.src/modules/mod_ftp/modules/ftp
-I/srv/.src/modules/mod_ftp/modules/ftp
-I/srv/.src/modules/mod_ftp/include -I/srv/httpd/include -I.
-I/srv/lib/include/apr-1 -I/srv/lib/include -prefer-pic -c
ftp_commands.c && touch ftp_commands.slo
/srv/lib/build-1/libtool --silent --mode=compile gcc -g -O2 -pthread
-DFTP_APXS_BUILD -DLINUX=2 -D_REENTRANT -D_GNU_SOURCE
-I/srv/.src/modules/mod_ftp/modules/ftp
-I/srv/.src/modules/mod_ftp/modules/ftp
-I/srv/.src/modules/mod_ftp/include -I/srv/httpd/include -I.
-I/srv/lib/include/apr-1 -I/srv/lib/include -prefer-pic -c
ftp_data_filters.c && touch ftp_data_filters.slo
/srv/lib/build-1/libtool --silent --mode=compile gcc -g -O2 -pthread
-DFTP_APXS_BUILD -DLINUX=2 -D_REENTRANT -D_GNU_SOURCE
-I/srv/.src/modules/mod_ftp/modules/ftp
-I/srv/.src/modules/mod_ftp/modules/ftp
-I/srv/.src/modules/mod_ftp/include -I/srv/httpd/include -I.
-I/srv/lib/include/apr-1 -I/srv/lib/include -prefer-pic -c
ftp_filters.c && touch ftp_filters.slo
ftp_commands.c: In function ‘ftp_cmd_pass’:
ftp_commands.c:1080: error: ‘ap_loaded_modules’ undeclared (first use
in this function)
ftp_commands.c:1080: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
ftp_commands.c:1080: error: for each function it appears in.)
ftp_commands.c:1083: error: ‘ap_top_module’ undeclared (first use in
this function)
make[1]: *** [ftp_commands.slo] Error 1
make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
make[1]: Leaving directory `/srv/.src/modules/mod_ftp/modules/ftp'
make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
---
~Jorge
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 10:14 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
<wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> mod_ftp fans;
>
> We seem to have identified and solved our remaining 0.9.2 beta issues,
> so it's time for another, perhaps the final try on the way to GA!
>
> Please fetch up the newly prepared mod_ftp-0.9.3.tar.gz (available
> now), or the win32/netware/os2 suitable package mod_ftp-0.9.3-crlf.zip
> (still needs to sync in the next hour) from:
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/mod_ftp/
>
> review, take it for a spin, and cast your choice
>
> [ ] -1 for any release of 0.9.3 (regressed from 0.9.2?)
> [ ] +1 to release as 0.9.3-beta
> [ ] +1 to release as 0.9.3-beta, and ready to tag GA (1.0.0)
>
> Please let us know if you test the two significant issues;
>
> CURRENT RELEASE NOTES:
>
> * EPSV and EPRT need real world testing for different routing and DMZ
> cases and validating a range of IPv6-enabled clients' interop.
> Note many IPv4-only NAT routers appear to ignore EPRT commands,
> even as they would fix up NAT addresses from PORT commands.
>
> * Extra attention should be paid to PORT and EPRT connections, especially
> when assigned low numbered ports, e.g. FTPActiveRange 20
>
> These are my only hesitations in blessing the release 1.0.0 just yet.
> Please be brutal in respect to testing both aspects :)
>
> For getting started,
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/mod_ftp/
>
> and
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/mod_ftp/tags/0.9.3/README-FTP
>
> Bill
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] release httpd mod_ftp-0.9.3 beta?
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
> [X] -1 for any release of 0.9.3 (regressed from 0.9.2?)
It's not a regression, but I'm trying to correct the fact that normal
disconnects, al la
>>> QUIT
<<< 221 Goodbye.
result in half closed sockets. The data connections both passive and
active are correctly closed, and lie in TIME_WAIT for a bit, but these
control connections are sitting at;
tcp 1 0 ::1:21 ::1:46180 CLOSE_WAIT
tcp 0 0 ::1:46180 ::1:21 FIN_WAIT2
not looking good. But reviewing the code, I don't see the flaw, so
I'll end up spending tracing time on this to work out why we hadn't
correctly invoked apr_lingering_close. Bother.
With this fixed; and hopefully a resolution to the issue I had raised
with Guenter r.e. file overwriting, and the issue I raised about the
oddness with FNM_PERIOD matching, I really think we are ready for the
"this looks like 1.0.0" release.
Bill