[PATCH] Re: ProxyBlock question

[Joe Orton <jo...@redhat.com>]

On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 08:42:34AM +0000, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group wrote:
> So after this rant I come to the conclusion that your proposed approach is the best:
> 
> Only compare the names and not the IP's in the proxy case.

Attached does this - any comments?  I suppose this requires a major MMN 
bump?  Can backport it in a backwards-compat way for 2.4.x, though.

Re: [PATCH] Re: ProxyBlock question

[Joe Orton <jo...@redhat.com>]

On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 10:05:34AM +0000, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group wrote:
> Looks good. Slight optimization:
> 
> If addr == NULL we can just skip the whole  while (conf_addr) {
> loop.

Thanks to all for the feedback.

main fix: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1365001&view=rev
pool use fix: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1365020&view=rev
& style fix: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1365029&view=rev

...will propose backport shortly.

Regards, Joe

RE: [PATCH] Re: ProxyBlock question

[Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group <ru...@vodafone.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Orton [mailto:jorton@redhat.com]
> Sent: Dienstag, 24. Juli 2012 11:37
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Subject: [PATCH] Re: ProxyBlock question
> 
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 08:42:34AM +0000, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group
> wrote:
> > So after this rant I come to the conclusion that your proposed
> approach is the best:
> >
> > Only compare the names and not the IP's in the proxy case.
> 
> Attached does this - any comments?  I suppose this requires a major MMN
> bump?  Can backport it in a backwards-compat way for 2.4.x, though.

Looks good. Slight optimization:

If addr == NULL we can just skip the whole  while (conf_addr) {
loop.

Regards

Rüdiger