You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org by Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com> on 2018/02/01 10:15:29 UTC
RE: Rivet 3.0.1
Hi Massimo
Test suite works for prefork, but just for the fun of it, I checked with the worker (and event) mpms, as you mentioned that the worker bridge was improved. The test suite fails for some tests on both other mpms. See below.
Can you quickly elaborate whether that's OK and/or what you'd expect to work and what not?
Thanks for your continued support...
Ronnie
Prefork MPM:
rivet.test: Total 83 Passed 83 Skipped 0 Failed 0
Worker MPM:
==== headers-1.1 load_headers test FAILED
==== include-1.1 Include command FAILED
==== broken-1.1 error page test FAILED
==== config-1.2 ErrorScript config test FAILED
==== vhost-5.1 vhost with ChildInitScript FAILED
==== vhost-6.2 vhost with BeforeScript and SeparateVirtualInterps FAILED
==== inspect-1.1 basic introspection FAILED
==== bailout-3.3 ::rivet::try handling continue return code FAILED
==== bailout-3.5 ::rivet::try handling ::rivet::exit FAILED
rivet.test: Total 83 Passed 74 Skipped 0 Failed 9
Event MPM:
==== postvariables-1.1 POST variables FAILED
==== postvariables-2.1 POST variables + I18N FAILED
==== postvariables-2.2 POST variables + I18N + encoding FAILED
==== postvariables-3.1 POST multi-value variable FAILED
==== postvariables-3.2 POST multi-value variable as list FAILED
==== postvariables-4.1 var_post FAILED
==== makeurl-1.1 makeurl FAILED
==== makeurl-1.2 makeurl FAILED
==== makeurl-1.3 makeurl FAILED
==== broken-1.1 error page test FAILED
==== config-auto-2.1 config test FAILED
==== config-auto-9.1 config test FAILED
==== vhost-5.1 vhost with ChildInitScript FAILED
==== vhost-6.1 vhost with ChildInitScript and SeparateVirtualInterps FAILED
==== vhost-6.3 vhost with AfterScript and SeparateVirtualInterps FAILED
==== bailout-2.2 ::rivet::catch command abort_page handling FAILED
==== bailout-3.0 ::rivet::try successful procedure call FAILED
rivet.test: Total 83 Passed 66 Skipped 0 Failed 17
--
We innovate. You win. http://netcetera.com
Ronnie Brunner | ronnie.brunner@netcetera.com | T +41 44 297 59 79 |
Netcetera AG | 8040 Zürich | Switzerland | http://netcetera.com |
-----Original Message-----
From: Massimo Manghi [mailto:massimo.manghi@alice.it]
Sent: Donnerstag, 1. Februar 2018 00:43
To: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org
Subject: Rivet 3.0.1
I just uploaded at http://www.rivetweb.org/~mxm/rivet/ a 3.0.1rc1
artifact for your evaluation. Basically, differences from 3.0.0 are
+ applied patch provided by George Petasis that correctly initializes
interpreters in the worker bridge
+ Documentation amended and expanded in various sections
I think we can proceed to vote within a few days, since differences are
crucial but point like
-- Massimo
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org
RE: Rivet 3.0.1
Posted by Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>.
Hi George
I'm also running the tests w/o TclX. I usually just fake the kill command (which is the only thing used from TclX) and run the tests as follows:
echo "package provide Tclx 0.0;proc kill {d s} {catch {exec kill \$s};after 2000}; set argv0 runtests.tcl; set argc 1; set argv /path/to/httpd; source runtests.tcl " | /path/to/tclsh
hth
Ronnie
--
We innovate. You win. http://netcetera.com
Ronnie Brunner | ronnie.brunner@netcetera.com | T +41 44 297 59 79 |
Netcetera AG | 8040 Zürich | Switzerland | http://netcetera.com |
-----Original Message-----
From: Georgios Petasis [mailto:petasisg@yahoo.gr]
Sent: Sonntag, 4. Februar 2018 14:54
To: Massimo Manghi <ma...@unipr.it>; Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>; Massimo Manghi <ma...@alice.it>
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org
Subject: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Dear Massimo,
According to the documentation:
https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/developer/new_api_2_4.html
We should also modify rivet.c to use AP_DECLARE_MODULE instead of
"module AP_MODULE_DECLARE_DATA rivet_module = " we now have.
I have tried it, and there was no difference (of course we must take
care the old way is used in versions < 2.4 of apache).
I tried to run the tests, but I am missing the TclX package. Where can I
find its sources? In sourceforge?
Best,
George
Στις 3/2/2018 20:52, ο Massimo Manghi έγραψε:
> I've just uploaded to www.rivetweb.org/~mxm/rivet a RC2 tar archive
> with a proposed patch of the problem that made most tests fail.
>
> The bug has surfaced when George introduced the APLOG_USE_MODULE in
> mod_rivet.h, since also rivetlib/rivetPkgInit.c used it in order to
> get the definition of the module globals. But since the generation of
> the pkgIndex.tcl file takes place outside of mod_rivet the mk_pkgIndex
> failed for rivetlib and became impossible to mod_rivet to find the
> library. As as consequence the server failed because rivetlib is
> loaded in the process of initializing a Rivet interpreter
>
> Actually the introduction of the macro was correct and it's was
> librivet/rivetPkgInit.c duty to determine the ::rivet name space
> pointer in a different and sane way. This is the crux of the patch
> included in RC2
>
> -- Massimo
>
> On 02/01/2018 01:07 PM, Ronnie Brunner wrote:
>> Hi Massimo
>>
>> Attached the output (stout and sdterr) of running the test suite
>> (including the compilation of rivet), the error_log and access_log
>> from rivet-3.0.1/tests after running the test suite.
>>
>> I'm running a CentOS Linux release 7.1.1503 (Core) os for these
>> tests, Tcl8.6.6 and httpd 2.4.27 with the worker mpm. The only
>> modification to runtests.tcl was to remove the prefork module check,
>> which obviously fails if you run the worker mpm.
>>
>> Let me know if you need anything else.
>>
>> Hth Ronnie
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org
Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Posted by Massimo MANGHI <ma...@unipr.it>.
What is the sane way to check the version number in preprocessor #if .... clauses. I looked at ap_release.h but I didn't find a macro specialized for that
-- Massimo
________________________________
Da: Georgios Petasis <pe...@yahoo.gr>
Inviato: domenica 4 febbraio 2018 14:54
A: Massimo MANGHI; Ronnie Brunner; Massimo Manghi
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org
Oggetto: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Dear Massimo,
According to the documentation:
https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/developer/new_api_2_4.html
API Changes in Apache HTTP Server 2.4 since 2.2<https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/developer/new_api_2_4.html>
httpd.apache.org
This document describes changes to the Apache HTTPD API from version 2.2 to 2.4, that may be of interest to module/application developers and core hacks. As of the ...
We should also modify rivet.c to use AP_DECLARE_MODULE instead of
"module AP_MODULE_DECLARE_DATA rivet_module = " we now have.
I have tried it, and there was no difference (of course we must take
care the old way is used in versions < 2.4 of apache).
I tried to run the tests, but I am missing the TclX package. Where can I
find its sources? In sourceforge?
Best,
George
Στις 3/2/2018 20:52, ο Massimo Manghi έγραψε:
> I've just uploaded to www.rivetweb.org/~mxm/rivet<http://www.rivetweb.org/~mxm/rivet> a RC2 tar archive
> with a proposed patch of the problem that made most tests fail.
>
> The bug has surfaced when George introduced the APLOG_USE_MODULE in
> mod_rivet.h, since also rivetlib/rivetPkgInit.c used it in order to
> get the definition of the module globals. But since the generation of
> the pkgIndex.tcl file takes place outside of mod_rivet the mk_pkgIndex
> failed for rivetlib and became impossible to mod_rivet to find the
> library. As as consequence the server failed because rivetlib is
> loaded in the process of initializing a Rivet interpreter
>
> Actually the introduction of the macro was correct and it's was
> librivet/rivetPkgInit.c duty to determine the ::rivet name space
> pointer in a different and sane way. This is the crux of the patch
> included in RC2
>
> -- Massimo
>
> On 02/01/2018 01:07 PM, Ronnie Brunner wrote:
>> Hi Massimo
>>
>> Attached the output (stout and sdterr) of running the test suite
>> (including the compilation of rivet), the error_log and access_log
>> from rivet-3.0.1/tests after running the test suite.
>>
>> I'm running a CentOS Linux release 7.1.1503 (Core) os for these
>> tests, Tcl8.6.6 and httpd 2.4.27 with the worker mpm. The only
>> modification to runtests.tcl was to remove the prefork module check,
>> which obviously fails if you run the worker mpm.
>>
>> Let me know if you need anything else.
>>
>> Hth Ronnie
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org
>
>
Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Posted by Massimo Manghi <ma...@alice.it>.
Good, really neat! I suppose this result is suggesting we drop TclX and
replace that function with our homemade kill proc with a cautionary
timing that could help to make tests at least reproducible.
cheers
-- Massimo
On 02/07/2018 06:36 PM, Ronnie Brunner wrote:
> Hi Massimo
>
> Well, who would have thought: I made the testsuite work for the
> worker mpm, by just giving my pseudo kill proc to fake TclX a bit
> more time (5 secs) to do the job ☺. I noticed that I didn’t get the
> same result always, that’s why I suspected a timing issue… The tests
> run forever now, but nothing fails for the worker mpm anymore!
>
> I still got only 83 tests though, but I’ll have to look into that
> another time. As for now, I guess, I scared you for nothing. Sorry
> for that!
>
> Gruess Ronnie -- We innovate. You win. http://netcetera.com
>
> Ronnie Brunner | ronnie.brunner@netcetera.com | T +41 44 297 59 79 |
> Netcetera AG | 8040 Zürich | Switzerland | http://netcetera.com |
> From: Massimo MANGHI [mailto:massimo.manghi@unipr.it] Sent: Dienstag,
> 6. Februar 2018 21:01 To: Ronnie Brunner
> <Ro...@netcetera.com>; Massimo Manghi
> <ma...@alice.it>; petasisg@yahoo.gr Cc:
> rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org Subject: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
>
>
> Thank you Ronnie, still the discrepancy between my PC and yours
> bothers me quite a bit. I would like to have more time to
> investigate, in the meanwhile would you sent over your error_log and
> output? Thank you
>
>
>
> -- Massimo Manghi
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org
RE: Rivet 3.0.1
Posted by Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>.
Hi Massimo
Well, who would have thought: I made the testsuite work for the worker mpm, by just giving my pseudo kill proc to fake TclX a bit more time (5 secs) to do the job ☺. I noticed that I didn’t get the same result always, that’s why I suspected a timing issue… The tests run forever now, but nothing fails for the worker mpm anymore!
I still got only 83 tests though, but I’ll have to look into that another time. As for now, I guess, I scared you for nothing. Sorry for that!
Gruess
Ronnie
--
We innovate. You win. http://netcetera.com
Ronnie Brunner | ronnie.brunner@netcetera.com | T +41 44 297 59 79 |
Netcetera AG | 8040 Zürich | Switzerland | http://netcetera.com |
From: Massimo MANGHI [mailto:massimo.manghi@unipr.it]
Sent: Dienstag, 6. Februar 2018 21:01
To: Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>; Massimo Manghi <ma...@alice.it>; petasisg@yahoo.gr
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org
Subject: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Thank you Ronnie, still the discrepancy between my PC and yours bothers me quite a bit. I would like to have more time to investigate, in the meanwhile would you sent over your error_log and output? Thank you
-- Massimo Manghi
________________________________
Da: Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>>
Inviato: martedì 6 febbraio 2018 20:48
A: Massimo MANGHI; Massimo Manghi; petasisg@yahoo.gr<ma...@yahoo.gr>
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
Oggetto: RE: Rivet 3.0.1
Hi Massimo
Sorry, I haven’t noticed your answer w/ the rc2 earlier. Thought it referred to George’s issue with the test suite…
I have compared 3.0.1rc1 w/ 3.0.1rc2: they show the same result. Running tests now gives 38 failed tests for both. (I’m not sure why I got fewer errors when I tried initially. Could well be that some of it is and or was timing related, the machine I use is used by many and although virtualized, it’s not always under the same or even just similar load…)
So I stand by the statement: it’s an improvement since 3.0.0, so nothing speaks against a release, but there is still something amiss. (No guarantee it’s not my somewhat homegrown environment: I compiled httpd as well as Tcl locally to have control over the versions and I refer to only those versions when testing. Great for testing different versions, but as I learned, the test suite currently runs on Tcl8.6 and http 2.4 only…. I use Tcl.8.6.6 and hddpt-2.4.27 currently)
Regards
Ronnie
--
We innovate. You win. http://netcetera.com
Ronnie Brunner | ronnie.brunner@netcetera.com<ma...@netcetera.com> | T +41 44 297 59 79 |
Netcetera AG | 8040 Zürich | Switzerland | http://netcetera.com |
From: Massimo MANGHI [mailto:massimo.manghi@unipr.it]
Sent: Dienstag, 6. Februar 2018 18:33
To: Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>>; Massimo Manghi <ma...@alice.it>>; petasisg@yahoo.gr<ma...@yahoo.gr>
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Hi Ronnie are your latest test results obtained from 3.0.1rc2? I fixed a problem that made the server fail in most cases, their are all OK for me now
Another issue with your test output is the overall number of tests actually carried out: 83. I have 130 tests running and 3.0.1rc2 passes each and everyone on my PC. Why your test suite is avoiding ~50 tests?
-- Massimo
________________________________
Da: Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>>
Inviato: martedì 6 febbraio 2018 17:05
A: Massimo MANGHI; Massimo Manghi; petasisg@yahoo.gr<ma...@yahoo.gr>
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
Oggetto: RE: Rivet 3.0.1
Hi Massimo
My problem for the worker mpm is certainly not a blocker, as I never managed (actually, really tried) to run the tests for that mpm. I always tested exclusively against prefork, mainly because I thought the others aren’t supported yet.
Also: The test result of Rivet 3.0.0 that I get in my setup is much worse than the result of 3.0.1. So 3.0.1 actually brings an improvement as previously, almost no tests worked. (I just reran my setup w/ 3.0.0 ->
rivet.test: Total 83 Passed 4 Skipped 0 Failed 79)
Hth and best regards
Ronnie
--
We innovate. You win. http://netcetera.com
Ronnie Brunner | ronnie.brunner@netcetera.com<ma...@netcetera.com> | T +41 44 297 59 79 |
Netcetera AG | 8040 Zürich | Switzerland | http://netcetera.com |
From: Massimo MANGHI [mailto:massimo.manghi@unipr.it]
Sent: Dienstag, 6. Februar 2018 16:29
To: Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>>; Massimo Manghi <ma...@alice.it>>; petasisg@yahoo.gr<ma...@yahoo.gr>
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Should we consider this issue a reason for withholding 3.0.1? I think that as long as 2.2 is supported we may exploit the compatibility with 2.4. When 2.2 is deprecated we may proceed with the new macro definition. This is good example where having a versioning system like git or fossil could be handy.
Can I start the vote for releasing 3.0.1?
-- Massimo
________________________________
Da: Georgios Petasis <pe...@yahoo.gr>>
Inviato: domenica 4 febbraio 2018 14:54
A: Massimo MANGHI; Ronnie Brunner; Massimo Manghi
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
Oggetto: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Dear Massimo,
According to the documentation:
https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/developer/new_api_2_4.html
We should also modify rivet.c to use AP_DECLARE_MODULE instead of
"module AP_MODULE_DECLARE_DATA rivet_module = " we now have.
I have tried it, and there was no difference (of course we must take
care the old way is used in versions < 2.4 of apache).
I tried to run the tests, but I am missing the TclX package. Where can I
find its sources? In sourceforge?
Best,
George
Στις 3/2/2018 20:52, ο Massimo Manghi έγραψε:
> I've just uploaded to www.rivetweb.org/~mxm/rivet<http://www.rivetweb.org/~mxm/rivet> a RC2 tar archive
> with a proposed patch of the problem that made most tests fail.
>
> The bug has surfaced when George introduced the APLOG_USE_MODULE in
> mod_rivet.h, since also rivetlib/rivetPkgInit.c used it in order to
> get the definition of the module globals. But since the generation of
> the pkgIndex.tcl file takes place outside of mod_rivet the mk_pkgIndex
> failed for rivetlib and became impossible to mod_rivet to find the
> library. As as consequence the server failed because rivetlib is
> loaded in the process of initializing a Rivet interpreter
>
> Actually the introduction of the macro was correct and it's was
> librivet/rivetPkgInit.c duty to determine the ::rivet name space
> pointer in a different and sane way. This is the crux of the patch
> included in RC2
>
> -- Massimo
>
> On 02/01/2018 01:07 PM, Ronnie Brunner wrote:
>> Hi Massimo
>>
>> Attached the output (stout and sdterr) of running the test suite
>> (including the compilation of rivet), the error_log and access_log
>> from rivet-3.0.1/tests after running the test suite.
>>
>> I'm running a CentOS Linux release 7.1.1503 (Core) os for these
>> tests, Tcl8.6.6 and httpd 2.4.27 with the worker mpm. The only
>> modification to runtests.tcl was to remove the prefork module check,
>> which obviously fails if you run the worker mpm.
>>
>> Let me know if you need anything else.
>>
>> Hth Ronnie
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
>
>
Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Posted by Massimo Manghi <ma...@unipr.it>.
Thank you Ronnie, I checked the patch and it's fine to me....not for
laziness but I invite you to commit the patch yourself. I would be happy
you receive a full credit and have your name in one of rivet's ChangeLog
entries.
-- Massimo
On 02/08/2018 12:24 PM, Ronnie Brunner wrote:
> Hi Massimo
>
> I did a little digging and I finally understand what’s happening and I
> could fix my testing problems (hopefully for good)…
>
> 1.When I ran the test, the “Running all tests against one server
> process.” failed to run the tests because Tcl didn’t find the librivet
> package and threw an error. Providing for this in my automation script
> solved the problem.-> I now run 130 tests J
>
> 2.While I faked TclX’s kill, I didn’t fake the wait, which is also used,
> but within a catch, that’s why I never noticed. And that’s why I had the
> timing issues: my kill just needs to properly “wait” too J
>
> To address both (for easier handling), I propose the following changes:
>
> for 1. I added a [puts stderr $::errorInfo] to show what goes wrong if
> the code provided for the test fails (this revealed the problem of the
> missing librivet)
>
> for 2. I porpose to get rid of TclX by providing a “waiting” Tcl
> implementation using [exec kill] and [exec ps]. (Yes, not particularly
> portable, but I don’t think the test run under Windows anyway, do
> they?.) Also, you currently send a QUIT signal to apache to kill the
> process, this is not very reliable for me. Also the TERM signal takes
> 1.5 seconds on average to kill the process (in my env) sometimes over 2
> seconds, that’s why some of my tests fails. I changed the signal to KILL
> and the suite runs much faster now.
>
> A modified version of test/pachetest/apachetest.tcl and the
> corresponding patch is attached.
>
> Last but not least, I propose to drop the module test for the prefork
> mpm in tests/runtests.tcl so we can test w/o modification against both mpms…
>
> Thanks and best regards
>
> Ronnie
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org
RE: Rivet 3.0.1
Posted by Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>.
Hi Massimo
I did a little digging and I finally understand what’s happening and I could fix my testing problems (hopefully for good)…
1. When I ran the test, the “Running all tests against one server process.” failed to run the tests because Tcl didn’t find the librivet package and threw an error. Providing for this in my automation script solved the problem.-> I now run 130 tests ☺
2. While I faked TclX’s kill, I didn’t fake the wait, which is also used, but within a catch, that’s why I never noticed. And that’s why I had the timing issues: my kill just needs to properly “wait” too ☺
To address both (for easier handling), I propose the following changes:
for 1. I added a [puts stderr $::errorInfo] to show what goes wrong if the code provided for the test fails (this revealed the problem of the missing librivet)
for 2. I porpose to get rid of TclX by providing a “waiting” Tcl implementation using [exec kill] and [exec ps]. (Yes, not particularly portable, but I don’t think the test run under Windows anyway, do they?.) Also, you currently send a QUIT signal to apache to kill the process, this is not very reliable for me. Also the TERM signal takes 1.5 seconds on average to kill the process (in my env) sometimes over 2 seconds, that’s why some of my tests fails. I changed the signal to KILL and the suite runs much faster now.
A modified version of test/pachetest/apachetest.tcl and the corresponding patch is attached.
Last but not least, I propose to drop the module test for the prefork mpm in tests/runtests.tcl so we can test w/o modification against both mpms…
Thanks and best regards
Ronnie
--
We innovate. You win. http://netcetera.com
Ronnie Brunner | ronnie.brunner@netcetera.com | T +41 44 297 59 79 |
Netcetera AG | 8040 Zürich | Switzerland | http://netcetera.com |
From: Massimo MANGHI [mailto:massimo.manghi@unipr.it]
Sent: Dienstag, 6. Februar 2018 21:01
To: Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>; Massimo Manghi <ma...@alice.it>; petasisg@yahoo.gr
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org
Subject: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Thank you Ronnie, still the discrepancy between my PC and yours bothers me quite a bit. I would like to have more time to investigate, in the meanwhile would you sent over your error_log and output? Thank you
-- Massimo Manghi
________________________________
Da: Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>>
Inviato: martedì 6 febbraio 2018 20:48
A: Massimo MANGHI; Massimo Manghi; petasisg@yahoo.gr<ma...@yahoo.gr>
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
Oggetto: RE: Rivet 3.0.1
Hi Massimo
Sorry, I haven’t noticed your answer w/ the rc2 earlier. Thought it referred to George’s issue with the test suite…
I have compared 3.0.1rc1 w/ 3.0.1rc2: they show the same result. Running tests now gives 38 failed tests for both. (I’m not sure why I got fewer errors when I tried initially. Could well be that some of it is and or was timing related, the machine I use is used by many and although virtualized, it’s not always under the same or even just similar load…)
So I stand by the statement: it’s an improvement since 3.0.0, so nothing speaks against a release, but there is still something amiss. (No guarantee it’s not my somewhat homegrown environment: I compiled httpd as well as Tcl locally to have control over the versions and I refer to only those versions when testing. Great for testing different versions, but as I learned, the test suite currently runs on Tcl8.6 and http 2.4 only…. I use Tcl.8.6.6 and hddpt-2.4.27 currently)
Regards
Ronnie
--
We innovate. You win. http://netcetera.com
Ronnie Brunner | ronnie.brunner@netcetera.com<ma...@netcetera.com> | T +41 44 297 59 79 |
Netcetera AG | 8040 Zürich | Switzerland | http://netcetera.com |
From: Massimo MANGHI [mailto:massimo.manghi@unipr.it]
Sent: Dienstag, 6. Februar 2018 18:33
To: Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>>; Massimo Manghi <ma...@alice.it>>; petasisg@yahoo.gr<ma...@yahoo.gr>
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Hi Ronnie are your latest test results obtained from 3.0.1rc2? I fixed a problem that made the server fail in most cases, their are all OK for me now
Another issue with your test output is the overall number of tests actually carried out: 83. I have 130 tests running and 3.0.1rc2 passes each and everyone on my PC. Why your test suite is avoiding ~50 tests?
-- Massimo
________________________________
Da: Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>>
Inviato: martedì 6 febbraio 2018 17:05
A: Massimo MANGHI; Massimo Manghi; petasisg@yahoo.gr<ma...@yahoo.gr>
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
Oggetto: RE: Rivet 3.0.1
Hi Massimo
My problem for the worker mpm is certainly not a blocker, as I never managed (actually, really tried) to run the tests for that mpm. I always tested exclusively against prefork, mainly because I thought the others aren’t supported yet.
Also: The test result of Rivet 3.0.0 that I get in my setup is much worse than the result of 3.0.1. So 3.0.1 actually brings an improvement as previously, almost no tests worked. (I just reran my setup w/ 3.0.0 ->
rivet.test: Total 83 Passed 4 Skipped 0 Failed 79)
Hth and best regards
Ronnie
--
We innovate. You win. http://netcetera.com
Ronnie Brunner | ronnie.brunner@netcetera.com<ma...@netcetera.com> | T +41 44 297 59 79 |
Netcetera AG | 8040 Zürich | Switzerland | http://netcetera.com |
From: Massimo MANGHI [mailto:massimo.manghi@unipr.it]
Sent: Dienstag, 6. Februar 2018 16:29
To: Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>>; Massimo Manghi <ma...@alice.it>>; petasisg@yahoo.gr<ma...@yahoo.gr>
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Should we consider this issue a reason for withholding 3.0.1? I think that as long as 2.2 is supported we may exploit the compatibility with 2.4. When 2.2 is deprecated we may proceed with the new macro definition. This is good example where having a versioning system like git or fossil could be handy.
Can I start the vote for releasing 3.0.1?
-- Massimo
________________________________
Da: Georgios Petasis <pe...@yahoo.gr>>
Inviato: domenica 4 febbraio 2018 14:54
A: Massimo MANGHI; Ronnie Brunner; Massimo Manghi
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
Oggetto: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Dear Massimo,
According to the documentation:
https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/developer/new_api_2_4.html
We should also modify rivet.c to use AP_DECLARE_MODULE instead of
"module AP_MODULE_DECLARE_DATA rivet_module = " we now have.
I have tried it, and there was no difference (of course we must take
care the old way is used in versions < 2.4 of apache).
I tried to run the tests, but I am missing the TclX package. Where can I
find its sources? In sourceforge?
Best,
George
Στις 3/2/2018 20:52, ο Massimo Manghi έγραψε:
> I've just uploaded to www.rivetweb.org/~mxm/rivet<http://www.rivetweb.org/~mxm/rivet> a RC2 tar archive
> with a proposed patch of the problem that made most tests fail.
>
> The bug has surfaced when George introduced the APLOG_USE_MODULE in
> mod_rivet.h, since also rivetlib/rivetPkgInit.c used it in order to
> get the definition of the module globals. But since the generation of
> the pkgIndex.tcl file takes place outside of mod_rivet the mk_pkgIndex
> failed for rivetlib and became impossible to mod_rivet to find the
> library. As as consequence the server failed because rivetlib is
> loaded in the process of initializing a Rivet interpreter
>
> Actually the introduction of the macro was correct and it's was
> librivet/rivetPkgInit.c duty to determine the ::rivet name space
> pointer in a different and sane way. This is the crux of the patch
> included in RC2
>
> -- Massimo
>
> On 02/01/2018 01:07 PM, Ronnie Brunner wrote:
>> Hi Massimo
>>
>> Attached the output (stout and sdterr) of running the test suite
>> (including the compilation of rivet), the error_log and access_log
>> from rivet-3.0.1/tests after running the test suite.
>>
>> I'm running a CentOS Linux release 7.1.1503 (Core) os for these
>> tests, Tcl8.6.6 and httpd 2.4.27 with the worker mpm. The only
>> modification to runtests.tcl was to remove the prefork module check,
>> which obviously fails if you run the worker mpm.
>>
>> Let me know if you need anything else.
>>
>> Hth Ronnie
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
>
>
Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Posted by Massimo MANGHI <ma...@unipr.it>.
Thank you Ronnie, still the discrepancy between my PC and yours bothers me quite a bit. I would like to have more time to investigate, in the meanwhile would you sent over your error_log and output? Thank you
-- Massimo Manghi
________________________________
Da: Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>
Inviato: martedì 6 febbraio 2018 20:48
A: Massimo MANGHI; Massimo Manghi; petasisg@yahoo.gr
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org
Oggetto: RE: Rivet 3.0.1
Hi Massimo
Sorry, I haven’t noticed your answer w/ the rc2 earlier. Thought it referred to George’s issue with the test suite…
I have compared 3.0.1rc1 w/ 3.0.1rc2: they show the same result. Running tests now gives 38 failed tests for both. (I’m not sure why I got fewer errors when I tried initially. Could well be that some of it is and or was timing related, the machine I use is used by many and although virtualized, it’s not always under the same or even just similar load…)
So I stand by the statement: it’s an improvement since 3.0.0, so nothing speaks against a release, but there is still something amiss. (No guarantee it’s not my somewhat homegrown environment: I compiled httpd as well as Tcl locally to have control over the versions and I refer to only those versions when testing. Great for testing different versions, but as I learned, the test suite currently runs on Tcl8.6 and http 2.4 only…. I use Tcl.8.6.6 and hddpt-2.4.27 currently)
Regards
Ronnie
--
We innovate. You win. http://netcetera.com
Ronnie Brunner | ronnie.brunner@netcetera.com | T +41 44 297 59 79 |
Netcetera AG | 8040 Zürich | Switzerland | http://netcetera.com |
From: Massimo MANGHI [mailto:massimo.manghi@unipr.it]
Sent: Dienstag, 6. Februar 2018 18:33
To: Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>; Massimo Manghi <ma...@alice.it>; petasisg@yahoo.gr
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org
Subject: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Hi Ronnie are your latest test results obtained from 3.0.1rc2? I fixed a problem that made the server fail in most cases, their are all OK for me now
Another issue with your test output is the overall number of tests actually carried out: 83. I have 130 tests running and 3.0.1rc2 passes each and everyone on my PC. Why your test suite is avoiding ~50 tests?
-- Massimo
________________________________
Da: Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>>
Inviato: martedì 6 febbraio 2018 17:05
A: Massimo MANGHI; Massimo Manghi; petasisg@yahoo.gr<ma...@yahoo.gr>
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
Oggetto: RE: Rivet 3.0.1
Hi Massimo
My problem for the worker mpm is certainly not a blocker, as I never managed (actually, really tried) to run the tests for that mpm. I always tested exclusively against prefork, mainly because I thought the others aren’t supported yet.
Also: The test result of Rivet 3.0.0 that I get in my setup is much worse than the result of 3.0.1. So 3.0.1 actually brings an improvement as previously, almost no tests worked. (I just reran my setup w/ 3.0.0 ->
rivet.test: Total 83 Passed 4 Skipped 0 Failed 79)
Hth and best regards
Ronnie
--
We innovate. You win. http://netcetera.com
Ronnie Brunner | ronnie.brunner@netcetera.com<ma...@netcetera.com> | T +41 44 297 59 79 |
Netcetera AG | 8040 Zürich | Switzerland | http://netcetera.com |
From: Massimo MANGHI [mailto:massimo.manghi@unipr.it]
Sent: Dienstag, 6. Februar 2018 16:29
To: Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>>; Massimo Manghi <ma...@alice.it>>; petasisg@yahoo.gr<ma...@yahoo.gr>
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Should we consider this issue a reason for withholding 3.0.1? I think that as long as 2.2 is supported we may exploit the compatibility with 2.4. When 2.2 is deprecated we may proceed with the new macro definition. This is good example where having a versioning system like git or fossil could be handy.
Can I start the vote for releasing 3.0.1?
-- Massimo
________________________________
Da: Georgios Petasis <pe...@yahoo.gr>>
Inviato: domenica 4 febbraio 2018 14:54
A: Massimo MANGHI; Ronnie Brunner; Massimo Manghi
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
Oggetto: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Dear Massimo,
According to the documentation:
https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/developer/new_api_2_4.html
We should also modify rivet.c to use AP_DECLARE_MODULE instead of
"module AP_MODULE_DECLARE_DATA rivet_module = " we now have.
I have tried it, and there was no difference (of course we must take
care the old way is used in versions < 2.4 of apache).
I tried to run the tests, but I am missing the TclX package. Where can I
find its sources? In sourceforge?
Best,
George
Στις 3/2/2018 20:52, ο Massimo Manghi έγραψε:
> I've just uploaded to www.rivetweb.org/~mxm/rivet<http://www.rivetweb.org/~mxm/rivet> a RC2 tar archive
> with a proposed patch of the problem that made most tests fail.
>
> The bug has surfaced when George introduced the APLOG_USE_MODULE in
> mod_rivet.h, since also rivetlib/rivetPkgInit.c used it in order to
> get the definition of the module globals. But since the generation of
> the pkgIndex.tcl file takes place outside of mod_rivet the mk_pkgIndex
> failed for rivetlib and became impossible to mod_rivet to find the
> library. As as consequence the server failed because rivetlib is
> loaded in the process of initializing a Rivet interpreter
>
> Actually the introduction of the macro was correct and it's was
> librivet/rivetPkgInit.c duty to determine the ::rivet name space
> pointer in a different and sane way. This is the crux of the patch
> included in RC2
>
> -- Massimo
>
> On 02/01/2018 01:07 PM, Ronnie Brunner wrote:
>> Hi Massimo
>>
>> Attached the output (stout and sdterr) of running the test suite
>> (including the compilation of rivet), the error_log and access_log
>> from rivet-3.0.1/tests after running the test suite.
>>
>> I'm running a CentOS Linux release 7.1.1503 (Core) os for these
>> tests, Tcl8.6.6 and httpd 2.4.27 with the worker mpm. The only
>> modification to runtests.tcl was to remove the prefork module check,
>> which obviously fails if you run the worker mpm.
>>
>> Let me know if you need anything else.
>>
>> Hth Ronnie
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
>
>
RE: Rivet 3.0.1
Posted by Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>.
Hi Massimo
Sorry, I haven’t noticed your answer w/ the rc2 earlier. Thought it referred to George’s issue with the test suite…
I have compared 3.0.1rc1 w/ 3.0.1rc2: they show the same result. Running tests now gives 38 failed tests for both. (I’m not sure why I got fewer errors when I tried initially. Could well be that some of it is and or was timing related, the machine I use is used by many and although virtualized, it’s not always under the same or even just similar load…)
So I stand by the statement: it’s an improvement since 3.0.0, so nothing speaks against a release, but there is still something amiss. (No guarantee it’s not my somewhat homegrown environment: I compiled httpd as well as Tcl locally to have control over the versions and I refer to only those versions when testing. Great for testing different versions, but as I learned, the test suite currently runs on Tcl8.6 and http 2.4 only…. I use Tcl.8.6.6 and hddpt-2.4.27 currently)
Regards
Ronnie
--
We innovate. You win. http://netcetera.com
Ronnie Brunner | ronnie.brunner@netcetera.com | T +41 44 297 59 79 |
Netcetera AG | 8040 Zürich | Switzerland | http://netcetera.com |
From: Massimo MANGHI [mailto:massimo.manghi@unipr.it]
Sent: Dienstag, 6. Februar 2018 18:33
To: Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>; Massimo Manghi <ma...@alice.it>; petasisg@yahoo.gr
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org
Subject: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Hi Ronnie are your latest test results obtained from 3.0.1rc2? I fixed a problem that made the server fail in most cases, their are all OK for me now
Another issue with your test output is the overall number of tests actually carried out: 83. I have 130 tests running and 3.0.1rc2 passes each and everyone on my PC. Why your test suite is avoiding ~50 tests?
-- Massimo
________________________________
Da: Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>>
Inviato: martedì 6 febbraio 2018 17:05
A: Massimo MANGHI; Massimo Manghi; petasisg@yahoo.gr<ma...@yahoo.gr>
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
Oggetto: RE: Rivet 3.0.1
Hi Massimo
My problem for the worker mpm is certainly not a blocker, as I never managed (actually, really tried) to run the tests for that mpm. I always tested exclusively against prefork, mainly because I thought the others aren’t supported yet.
Also: The test result of Rivet 3.0.0 that I get in my setup is much worse than the result of 3.0.1. So 3.0.1 actually brings an improvement as previously, almost no tests worked. (I just reran my setup w/ 3.0.0 ->
rivet.test: Total 83 Passed 4 Skipped 0 Failed 79)
Hth and best regards
Ronnie
--
We innovate. You win. http://netcetera.com
Ronnie Brunner | ronnie.brunner@netcetera.com<ma...@netcetera.com> | T +41 44 297 59 79 |
Netcetera AG | 8040 Zürich | Switzerland | http://netcetera.com |
From: Massimo MANGHI [mailto:massimo.manghi@unipr.it]
Sent: Dienstag, 6. Februar 2018 16:29
To: Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>>; Massimo Manghi <ma...@alice.it>>; petasisg@yahoo.gr<ma...@yahoo.gr>
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Should we consider this issue a reason for withholding 3.0.1? I think that as long as 2.2 is supported we may exploit the compatibility with 2.4. When 2.2 is deprecated we may proceed with the new macro definition. This is good example where having a versioning system like git or fossil could be handy.
Can I start the vote for releasing 3.0.1?
-- Massimo
________________________________
Da: Georgios Petasis <pe...@yahoo.gr>>
Inviato: domenica 4 febbraio 2018 14:54
A: Massimo MANGHI; Ronnie Brunner; Massimo Manghi
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
Oggetto: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Dear Massimo,
According to the documentation:
https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/developer/new_api_2_4.html
We should also modify rivet.c to use AP_DECLARE_MODULE instead of
"module AP_MODULE_DECLARE_DATA rivet_module = " we now have.
I have tried it, and there was no difference (of course we must take
care the old way is used in versions < 2.4 of apache).
I tried to run the tests, but I am missing the TclX package. Where can I
find its sources? In sourceforge?
Best,
George
Στις 3/2/2018 20:52, ο Massimo Manghi έγραψε:
> I've just uploaded to www.rivetweb.org/~mxm/rivet<http://www.rivetweb.org/~mxm/rivet> a RC2 tar archive
> with a proposed patch of the problem that made most tests fail.
>
> The bug has surfaced when George introduced the APLOG_USE_MODULE in
> mod_rivet.h, since also rivetlib/rivetPkgInit.c used it in order to
> get the definition of the module globals. But since the generation of
> the pkgIndex.tcl file takes place outside of mod_rivet the mk_pkgIndex
> failed for rivetlib and became impossible to mod_rivet to find the
> library. As as consequence the server failed because rivetlib is
> loaded in the process of initializing a Rivet interpreter
>
> Actually the introduction of the macro was correct and it's was
> librivet/rivetPkgInit.c duty to determine the ::rivet name space
> pointer in a different and sane way. This is the crux of the patch
> included in RC2
>
> -- Massimo
>
> On 02/01/2018 01:07 PM, Ronnie Brunner wrote:
>> Hi Massimo
>>
>> Attached the output (stout and sdterr) of running the test suite
>> (including the compilation of rivet), the error_log and access_log
>> from rivet-3.0.1/tests after running the test suite.
>>
>> I'm running a CentOS Linux release 7.1.1503 (Core) os for these
>> tests, Tcl8.6.6 and httpd 2.4.27 with the worker mpm. The only
>> modification to runtests.tcl was to remove the prefork module check,
>> which obviously fails if you run the worker mpm.
>>
>> Let me know if you need anything else.
>>
>> Hth Ronnie
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
>
>
Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Posted by Massimo MANGHI <ma...@unipr.it>.
Hi Ronnie are your latest test results obtained from 3.0.1rc2? I fixed a problem that made the server fail in most cases, their are all OK for me now
Another issue with your test output is the overall number of tests actually carried out: 83. I have 130 tests running and 3.0.1rc2 passes each and everyone on my PC. Why your test suite is avoiding ~50 tests?
-- Massimo
________________________________
Da: Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>
Inviato: martedì 6 febbraio 2018 17:05
A: Massimo MANGHI; Massimo Manghi; petasisg@yahoo.gr
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org
Oggetto: RE: Rivet 3.0.1
Hi Massimo
My problem for the worker mpm is certainly not a blocker, as I never managed (actually, really tried) to run the tests for that mpm. I always tested exclusively against prefork, mainly because I thought the others aren’t supported yet.
Also: The test result of Rivet 3.0.0 that I get in my setup is much worse than the result of 3.0.1. So 3.0.1 actually brings an improvement as previously, almost no tests worked. (I just reran my setup w/ 3.0.0 ->
rivet.test: Total 83 Passed 4 Skipped 0 Failed 79)
Hth and best regards
Ronnie
--
We innovate. You win. http://netcetera.com
Ronnie Brunner | ronnie.brunner@netcetera.com | T +41 44 297 59 79 |
Netcetera AG | 8040 Zürich | Switzerland | http://netcetera.com |
From: Massimo MANGHI [mailto:massimo.manghi@unipr.it]
Sent: Dienstag, 6. Februar 2018 16:29
To: Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>; Massimo Manghi <ma...@alice.it>; petasisg@yahoo.gr
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org
Subject: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Should we consider this issue a reason for withholding 3.0.1? I think that as long as 2.2 is supported we may exploit the compatibility with 2.4. When 2.2 is deprecated we may proceed with the new macro definition. This is good example where having a versioning system like git or fossil could be handy.
Can I start the vote for releasing 3.0.1?
-- Massimo
________________________________
Da: Georgios Petasis <pe...@yahoo.gr>>
Inviato: domenica 4 febbraio 2018 14:54
A: Massimo MANGHI; Ronnie Brunner; Massimo Manghi
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
Oggetto: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Dear Massimo,
According to the documentation:
https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/developer/new_api_2_4.html
We should also modify rivet.c to use AP_DECLARE_MODULE instead of
"module AP_MODULE_DECLARE_DATA rivet_module = " we now have.
I have tried it, and there was no difference (of course we must take
care the old way is used in versions < 2.4 of apache).
I tried to run the tests, but I am missing the TclX package. Where can I
find its sources? In sourceforge?
Best,
George
Στις 3/2/2018 20:52, ο Massimo Manghi έγραψε:
> I've just uploaded to www.rivetweb.org/~mxm/rivet<http://www.rivetweb.org/~mxm/rivet> a RC2 tar archive
> with a proposed patch of the problem that made most tests fail.
>
> The bug has surfaced when George introduced the APLOG_USE_MODULE in
> mod_rivet.h, since also rivetlib/rivetPkgInit.c used it in order to
> get the definition of the module globals. But since the generation of
> the pkgIndex.tcl file takes place outside of mod_rivet the mk_pkgIndex
> failed for rivetlib and became impossible to mod_rivet to find the
> library. As as consequence the server failed because rivetlib is
> loaded in the process of initializing a Rivet interpreter
>
> Actually the introduction of the macro was correct and it's was
> librivet/rivetPkgInit.c duty to determine the ::rivet name space
> pointer in a different and sane way. This is the crux of the patch
> included in RC2
>
> -- Massimo
>
> On 02/01/2018 01:07 PM, Ronnie Brunner wrote:
>> Hi Massimo
>>
>> Attached the output (stout and sdterr) of running the test suite
>> (including the compilation of rivet), the error_log and access_log
>> from rivet-3.0.1/tests after running the test suite.
>>
>> I'm running a CentOS Linux release 7.1.1503 (Core) os for these
>> tests, Tcl8.6.6 and httpd 2.4.27 with the worker mpm. The only
>> modification to runtests.tcl was to remove the prefork module check,
>> which obviously fails if you run the worker mpm.
>>
>> Let me know if you need anything else.
>>
>> Hth Ronnie
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
>
>
RE: Rivet 3.0.1
Posted by Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>.
Hi Massimo
My problem for the worker mpm is certainly not a blocker, as I never managed (actually, really tried) to run the tests for that mpm. I always tested exclusively against prefork, mainly because I thought the others aren’t supported yet.
Also: The test result of Rivet 3.0.0 that I get in my setup is much worse than the result of 3.0.1. So 3.0.1 actually brings an improvement as previously, almost no tests worked. (I just reran my setup w/ 3.0.0 ->
rivet.test: Total 83 Passed 4 Skipped 0 Failed 79)
Hth and best regards
Ronnie
--
We innovate. You win. http://netcetera.com
Ronnie Brunner | ronnie.brunner@netcetera.com | T +41 44 297 59 79 |
Netcetera AG | 8040 Zürich | Switzerland | http://netcetera.com |
From: Massimo MANGHI [mailto:massimo.manghi@unipr.it]
Sent: Dienstag, 6. Februar 2018 16:29
To: Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>; Massimo Manghi <ma...@alice.it>; petasisg@yahoo.gr
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org
Subject: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Should we consider this issue a reason for withholding 3.0.1? I think that as long as 2.2 is supported we may exploit the compatibility with 2.4. When 2.2 is deprecated we may proceed with the new macro definition. This is good example where having a versioning system like git or fossil could be handy.
Can I start the vote for releasing 3.0.1?
-- Massimo
________________________________
Da: Georgios Petasis <pe...@yahoo.gr>>
Inviato: domenica 4 febbraio 2018 14:54
A: Massimo MANGHI; Ronnie Brunner; Massimo Manghi
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
Oggetto: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Dear Massimo,
According to the documentation:
https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/developer/new_api_2_4.html
We should also modify rivet.c to use AP_DECLARE_MODULE instead of
"module AP_MODULE_DECLARE_DATA rivet_module = " we now have.
I have tried it, and there was no difference (of course we must take
care the old way is used in versions < 2.4 of apache).
I tried to run the tests, but I am missing the TclX package. Where can I
find its sources? In sourceforge?
Best,
George
Στις 3/2/2018 20:52, ο Massimo Manghi έγραψε:
> I've just uploaded to www.rivetweb.org/~mxm/rivet<http://www.rivetweb.org/~mxm/rivet> a RC2 tar archive
> with a proposed patch of the problem that made most tests fail.
>
> The bug has surfaced when George introduced the APLOG_USE_MODULE in
> mod_rivet.h, since also rivetlib/rivetPkgInit.c used it in order to
> get the definition of the module globals. But since the generation of
> the pkgIndex.tcl file takes place outside of mod_rivet the mk_pkgIndex
> failed for rivetlib and became impossible to mod_rivet to find the
> library. As as consequence the server failed because rivetlib is
> loaded in the process of initializing a Rivet interpreter
>
> Actually the introduction of the macro was correct and it's was
> librivet/rivetPkgInit.c duty to determine the ::rivet name space
> pointer in a different and sane way. This is the crux of the patch
> included in RC2
>
> -- Massimo
>
> On 02/01/2018 01:07 PM, Ronnie Brunner wrote:
>> Hi Massimo
>>
>> Attached the output (stout and sdterr) of running the test suite
>> (including the compilation of rivet), the error_log and access_log
>> from rivet-3.0.1/tests after running the test suite.
>>
>> I'm running a CentOS Linux release 7.1.1503 (Core) os for these
>> tests, Tcl8.6.6 and httpd 2.4.27 with the worker mpm. The only
>> modification to runtests.tcl was to remove the prefork module check,
>> which obviously fails if you run the worker mpm.
>>
>> Let me know if you need anything else.
>>
>> Hth Ronnie
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org<ma...@tcl.apache.org>
>
>
Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Posted by Massimo MANGHI <ma...@unipr.it>.
Should we consider this issue a reason for withholding 3.0.1? I think that as long as 2.2 is supported we may exploit the compatibility with 2.4. When 2.2 is deprecated we may proceed with the new macro definition. This is good example where having a versioning system like git or fossil could be handy.
Can I start the vote for releasing 3.0.1?
-- Massimo
________________________________
Da: Georgios Petasis <pe...@yahoo.gr>
Inviato: domenica 4 febbraio 2018 14:54
A: Massimo MANGHI; Ronnie Brunner; Massimo Manghi
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org
Oggetto: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Dear Massimo,
According to the documentation:
https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/developer/new_api_2_4.html
We should also modify rivet.c to use AP_DECLARE_MODULE instead of
"module AP_MODULE_DECLARE_DATA rivet_module = " we now have.
I have tried it, and there was no difference (of course we must take
care the old way is used in versions < 2.4 of apache).
I tried to run the tests, but I am missing the TclX package. Where can I
find its sources? In sourceforge?
Best,
George
Στις 3/2/2018 20:52, ο Massimo Manghi έγραψε:
> I've just uploaded to www.rivetweb.org/~mxm/rivet<http://www.rivetweb.org/~mxm/rivet> a RC2 tar archive
> with a proposed patch of the problem that made most tests fail.
>
> The bug has surfaced when George introduced the APLOG_USE_MODULE in
> mod_rivet.h, since also rivetlib/rivetPkgInit.c used it in order to
> get the definition of the module globals. But since the generation of
> the pkgIndex.tcl file takes place outside of mod_rivet the mk_pkgIndex
> failed for rivetlib and became impossible to mod_rivet to find the
> library. As as consequence the server failed because rivetlib is
> loaded in the process of initializing a Rivet interpreter
>
> Actually the introduction of the macro was correct and it's was
> librivet/rivetPkgInit.c duty to determine the ::rivet name space
> pointer in a different and sane way. This is the crux of the patch
> included in RC2
>
> -- Massimo
>
> On 02/01/2018 01:07 PM, Ronnie Brunner wrote:
>> Hi Massimo
>>
>> Attached the output (stout and sdterr) of running the test suite
>> (including the compilation of rivet), the error_log and access_log
>> from rivet-3.0.1/tests after running the test suite.
>>
>> I'm running a CentOS Linux release 7.1.1503 (Core) os for these
>> tests, Tcl8.6.6 and httpd 2.4.27 with the worker mpm. The only
>> modification to runtests.tcl was to remove the prefork module check,
>> which obviously fails if you run the worker mpm.
>>
>> Let me know if you need anything else.
>>
>> Hth Ronnie
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org
>
>
Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Posted by Georgios Petasis <pe...@yahoo.gr.INVALID>.
Dear Massimo,
According to the documentation:
https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/developer/new_api_2_4.html
We should also modify rivet.c to use AP_DECLARE_MODULE instead of
"module AP_MODULE_DECLARE_DATA rivet_module = " we now have.
I have tried it, and there was no difference (of course we must take
care the old way is used in versions < 2.4 of apache).
I tried to run the tests, but I am missing the TclX package. Where can I
find its sources? In sourceforge?
Best,
George
Στις 3/2/2018 20:52, ο Massimo Manghi έγραψε:
> I've just uploaded to www.rivetweb.org/~mxm/rivet a RC2 tar archive
> with a proposed patch of the problem that made most tests fail.
>
> The bug has surfaced when George introduced the APLOG_USE_MODULE in
> mod_rivet.h, since also rivetlib/rivetPkgInit.c used it in order to
> get the definition of the module globals. But since the generation of
> the pkgIndex.tcl file takes place outside of mod_rivet the mk_pkgIndex
> failed for rivetlib and became impossible to mod_rivet to find the
> library. As as consequence the server failed because rivetlib is
> loaded in the process of initializing a Rivet interpreter
>
> Actually the introduction of the macro was correct and it's was
> librivet/rivetPkgInit.c duty to determine the ::rivet name space
> pointer in a different and sane way. This is the crux of the patch
> included in RC2
>
> -- Massimo
>
> On 02/01/2018 01:07 PM, Ronnie Brunner wrote:
>> Hi Massimo
>>
>> Attached the output (stout and sdterr) of running the test suite
>> (including the compilation of rivet), the error_log and access_log
>> from rivet-3.0.1/tests after running the test suite.
>>
>> I'm running a CentOS Linux release 7.1.1503 (Core) os for these
>> tests, Tcl8.6.6 and httpd 2.4.27 with the worker mpm. The only
>> modification to runtests.tcl was to remove the prefork module check,
>> which obviously fails if you run the worker mpm.
>>
>> Let me know if you need anything else.
>>
>> Hth Ronnie
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org
Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Posted by Massimo Manghi <ma...@unipr.it>.
I've just uploaded to www.rivetweb.org/~mxm/rivet a RC2 tar archive with
a proposed patch of the problem that made most tests fail.
The bug has surfaced when George introduced the APLOG_USE_MODULE in
mod_rivet.h, since also rivetlib/rivetPkgInit.c used it in order to get
the definition of the module globals. But since the generation of the
pkgIndex.tcl file takes place outside of mod_rivet the mk_pkgIndex
failed for rivetlib and became impossible to mod_rivet to find the
library. As as consequence the server failed because rivetlib is loaded
in the process of initializing a Rivet interpreter
Actually the introduction of the macro was correct and it's was
librivet/rivetPkgInit.c duty to determine the ::rivet name space pointer
in a different and sane way. This is the crux of the patch included in RC2
-- Massimo
On 02/01/2018 01:07 PM, Ronnie Brunner wrote:
> Hi Massimo
>
> Attached the output (stout and sdterr) of running the test suite
> (including the compilation of rivet), the error_log and access_log
> from rivet-3.0.1/tests after running the test suite.
>
> I'm running a CentOS Linux release 7.1.1503 (Core) os for these
> tests, Tcl8.6.6 and httpd 2.4.27 with the worker mpm. The only
> modification to runtests.tcl was to remove the prefork module check,
> which obviously fails if you run the worker mpm.
>
> Let me know if you need anything else.
>
> Hth Ronnie
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org
RE: Rivet 3.0.1
Posted by Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>.
Hi Massimo
Attached the output (stout and sdterr) of running the test suite (including the compilation of rivet), the error_log and access_log from rivet-3.0.1/tests after running the test suite.
I'm running a CentOS Linux release 7.1.1503 (Core) os for these tests, Tcl8.6.6 and httpd 2.4.27 with the worker mpm.
The only modification to runtests.tcl was to remove the prefork module check, which obviously fails if you run the worker mpm.
Let me know if you need anything else.
Hth
Ronnie
--
We innovate. You win. http://netcetera.com
Ronnie Brunner | ronnie.brunner@netcetera.com | T +41 44 297 59 79 |
Netcetera AG | 8040 Zürich | Switzerland | http://netcetera.com |
-----Original Message-----
From: Massimo Manghi [mailto:massimo.manghi@unipr.it]
Sent: Donnerstag, 1. Februar 2018 12:33
To: Ronnie Brunner <Ro...@netcetera.com>; Massimo Manghi <ma...@alice.it>
Cc: rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org
Subject: Re: Rivet 3.0.1
That's sound like very bad news. I ran the test suite yesterday with the
worker bridge and it was OK (130 tests). What do you read in
tests/error_log ?
-- Massimo
On 02/01/2018 11:15 AM, Ronnie Brunner wrote:
> Hi Massimo
>
> Test suite works for prefork, but just for the fun of it, I checked with the worker (and event) mpms, as you mentioned that the worker bridge was improved. The test suite fails for some tests on both other mpms. See below.
>
> Can you quickly elaborate whether that's OK and/or what you'd expect to work and what not?
>
> Thanks for your continued support...
> Ronnie
>
>
> Prefork MPM:
> rivet.test: Total 83 Passed 83 Skipped 0 Failed 0
>
Re: Rivet 3.0.1
Posted by Massimo Manghi <ma...@unipr.it>.
That's sound like very bad news. I ran the test suite yesterday with the
worker bridge and it was OK (130 tests). What do you read in
tests/error_log ?
-- Massimo
On 02/01/2018 11:15 AM, Ronnie Brunner wrote:
> Hi Massimo
>
> Test suite works for prefork, but just for the fun of it, I checked with the worker (and event) mpms, as you mentioned that the worker bridge was improved. The test suite fails for some tests on both other mpms. See below.
>
> Can you quickly elaborate whether that's OK and/or what you'd expect to work and what not?
>
> Thanks for your continued support...
> Ronnie
>
>
> Prefork MPM:
> rivet.test: Total 83 Passed 83 Skipped 0 Failed 0
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org