You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com> on 2012/03/14 20:36:28 UTC
A push for 2.4.2
In the attempts to keep the momentum going, I'd like to push for
a httpd 2.4.2 release Real Soon Now.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.2 as GA
Posted by Stefan Fritsch <sf...@sfritsch.de>.
On Thursday 05 April 2012, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.2 can be found
> at the usual place:
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
>
> I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.2 GA.
> NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life
> easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part
> of the official release.
>
> [ ] +1: Good to go
> [ ] +0: meh
> [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why.
>
> Vote will last the normal 72 hrs.
+1
tested on Debian sid with system apr/apr-util and with --with-
included-apr
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.2 as GA
Posted by Michael Felt <ma...@gmail.com>.
my vote "does not count", but I have been able to build with vac.C v7 and
v11 with no changes
using gcc-4.6.3 needed some tweaking as apr is dependent upon compiler
used.
The apachectl -t "test" is successful on all three.
+1
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jagunet.com> wrote:
> The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.2 can be found
> at the usual place:
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
>
> I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.2 GA.
> NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life
> easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part
> of the official release.
>
> [ ] +1: Good to go
> [ ] +0: meh
> [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why.
>
> Vote will last the normal 72 hrs.
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.2 as GA
Posted by Steffen <in...@apachelounge.com>.
Tested and used by quite some users at AL.
All building and running good on all the flavors (Win32 and Win64 with VC9
and VC10).
Build with IPv6 and Crypto enabled and the deps:
apr-1.4.6 (patched) apr-util-1.4.1 apr-iconv-1.2.1 openssl-1.0.1-and-0.9.8u
zlib-1.2.6 pcre-8.30 libxml2-2.7.8 lua-5.1.5 expat-2.1.0
Steffen
ps,
The AcceptFilter none is still an issue, as reported.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Jagielski
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2012 2:24 PM Newsgroups: gmane.comp.apache.devel
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.2 as GA
The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.2 can be found
at the usual place:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.2 GA.
NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life
easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part
of the official release.
[ ] +1: Good to go
[ ] +0: meh
[ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why.
Vote will last the normal 72 hrs.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.2 as GA
Posted by Rainer Jung <ra...@kippdata.de>.
On 15.04.2012 19:10, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 15.04.2012 18:54, schrieb Daniel Gruno:
>>> so to me it looks as if either SSI or type assingment is currently
>>> broken - at least on NetWare, not yet tested on other platforms ...
>>>
>> I have tested your SSI tag with 2.4.2 on Debian 6 and Fedora 16 with the
>> following options set:
>>
>> Options +Includes
>> AddType text/html .shtml
>> AddOutputFilter INCLUDES .shtml
>>
>> Even without the html tags, this seems to work perfectly on the machines
>> I have tested it on, so it might just be a NetWare issue
>
> what is the reason to use Netware for a webserver?
> besides the fact that there are so many operating
> systems running httpd fine and Netware is EOL at all
Please start a new thread if you want to discuss a new topic. This is
out of scope for the 2.4.2 release vote.
And most likely it would be better to discuss it on the user list.
Thank you.
Rainer
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.2 as GA
Posted by "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
On 4/16/2012 8:10 AM, Igor Galić wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> This is NOT the list for starting OS wars on.
>
> Could you please point me to the correct list for that
> kind of thing? (:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AOperating_system_advocacy
That's been asked before ;-P
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.2 as GA
Posted by Igor Galić <i....@brainsware.org>.
----- Original Message -----
> This is NOT the list for starting OS wars on.
Could you please point me to the correct list for that
kind of thing? (:
i
--
Igor Galić
Tel: +43 (0) 664 886 22 883
Mail: i.galic@brainsware.org
URL: http://brainsware.org/
GPG: 6880 4155 74BD FD7C B515 2EA5 4B1D 9E08 A097 C9AE
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.2 as GA
Posted by Noel Butler <no...@ausics.net>.
This is NOT the list for starting OS wars on.
On Sun, 2012-04-15 at 19:10 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
> what is the reason to use Netware for a webserver?
> besides the fact that there are so many operating
> systems running httpd fine and Netware is EOL at all
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.2 as GA
Posted by Reindl Harald <h....@thelounge.net>.
Am 15.04.2012 18:54, schrieb Daniel Gruno:
>> so to me it looks as if either SSI or type assingment is currently
>> broken - at least on NetWare, not yet tested on other platforms ...
>>
> I have tested your SSI tag with 2.4.2 on Debian 6 and Fedora 16 with the
> following options set:
>
> Options +Includes
> AddType text/html .shtml
> AddOutputFilter INCLUDES .shtml
>
> Even without the html tags, this seems to work perfectly on the machines
> I have tested it on, so it might just be a NetWare issue
what is the reason to use Netware for a webserver?
besides the fact that there are so many operating
systems running httpd fine and Netware is EOL at all
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.2 as GA
Posted by Guenter Knauf <fu...@apache.org>.
Hi Daniel,
Am 15.04.2012 18:54, schrieb Daniel Gruno:
> I have tested your SSI tag with 2.4.2 on Debian 6 and Fedora 16 with the
> following options set:
>
> Options +Includes
> AddType text/html .shtml
> AddOutputFilter INCLUDES .shtml
>
> Even without the html tags, this seems to work perfectly on the machines
> I have tested it on, so it might just be a NetWare issue.
thanks for testing! SO I need to dig some deeper ...
Gün.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.2 as GA
Posted by Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk>.
On 15-04-2012 18:36, Guenter Knauf wrote:
> Am 15.04.2012 13:47, schrieb Noel Butler:
>> On Sun, 2012-04-15 at 13:10 +0200, Guenter Knauf wrote:
>>> <!--#echo var="REMOTE_ADDR"-->
>>
>> Related to the removal of config option DefaultType perhaps?
> maybe ...
> however then I would assume that assigning
> text/html shtml shtm
> in conf/mime.types should fix it - but it doesnt - at least not for
> NetWare; and even a
> ForceType text/html
> for the directory doesnt work for me, and
> AddType text/html .shtml
> doesnt either ...
>
> so to me it looks as if either SSI or type assingment is currently
> broken - at least on NetWare, not yet tested on other platforms ...
>
> Gün.
>
>
I have tested your SSI tag with 2.4.2 on Debian 6 and Fedora 16 with the
following options set:
Options +Includes
AddType text/html .shtml
AddOutputFilter INCLUDES .shtml
Even without the html tags, this seems to work perfectly on the machines
I have tested it on, so it might just be a NetWare issue.
With regards,
Daniel.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.2 as GA
Posted by Guenter Knauf <fu...@apache.org>.
Am 15.04.2012 13:47, schrieb Noel Butler:
> On Sun, 2012-04-15 at 13:10 +0200, Guenter Knauf wrote:
>> <!--#echo var="REMOTE_ADDR"-->
>
> Related to the removal of config option DefaultType perhaps?
maybe ...
however then I would assume that assigning
text/html shtml shtm
in conf/mime.types should fix it - but it doesnt - at least not for
NetWare; and even a
ForceType text/html
for the directory doesnt work for me, and
AddType text/html .shtml
doesnt either ...
so to me it looks as if either SSI or type assingment is currently
broken - at least on NetWare, not yet tested on other platforms ...
Gün.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.2 as GA
Posted by Noel Butler <no...@ausics.net>.
On Sun, 2012-04-15 at 13:10 +0200, Guenter Knauf wrote:
> <!--#echo var="REMOTE_ADDR"-->
Related to the removal of config option DefaultType perhaps?
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.2 as GA
Posted by Guenter Knauf <fu...@apache.org>.
Am 06.04.2012 18:39, schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>
> On Apr 5, 2012, at 8:24 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>> The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.2 can be found
>> at the usual place:
>>
>> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
>>
>> I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.2 GA.
>> NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life
>> easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part
>> of the official release.
I just found that a simple SSI .shtml does not work as plain text any
more as it did with 2.2.x;
f.e. an ip.shtml with:
<!--#echo var="REMOTE_ADDR"-->
gives me an empty reply with 2.4.2 while same works fine with 2.2.x;
if I surround the SSI with html tags like:
<html>
<!--#echo var="REMOTE_ADDR"-->
</html>
it works with 2.4.2 - is this now intented behavior, or am I missing
something in the config?
Gün.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.2 as GA
Posted by Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com>.
>> [X] +1: Good to go
>
+1 on AIX / xlc / PPC64, no regressions.
(100% other than SSL, not normally loaded on my AIX regression)
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.2 as GA
Posted by Noel Butler <no...@ausics.net>.
On Fri, 2012-04-06 at 12:39 -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> On Apr 5, 2012, at 8:24 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> > The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.2 can be found
> > at the usual place:
> >
> > http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
> >
> > I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.2 GA.
> > NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life
> > easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part
> > of the official release.
> >
> > [X] +1: Good to go
>
> +1 on Fed16, OSX (Xcode 4.3.2), FreeBSD 8.2-p6
+1 Slackware 13.1 , 13.37
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.2 as GA
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Apr 5, 2012, at 8:24 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.2 can be found
> at the usual place:
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
>
> I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.2 GA.
> NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life
> easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part
> of the official release.
>
> [X] +1: Good to go
+1 on Fed16, OSX (Xcode 4.3.2), FreeBSD 8.2-p6
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.2 as GA
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
I'm planning on letting the vote run for a few more days, just
in case, and, if all is well, we can announce on Monday.
Good news always should be announced early in the week :)
On Apr 5, 2012, at 8:24 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.2 can be found
> at the usual place:
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
>
> I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.2 GA.
> NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life
> easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part
> of the official release.
>
> [ ] +1: Good to go
> [ ] +0: meh
> [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why.
>
> Vote will last the normal 72 hrs.
>
Re: [RESULT] Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.2 as GA
Posted by Igor Galić <i....@brainsware.org>.
+1
----- Original Message -----
> With 3+ +1 (binding) votes and no -1s, I call the vote CLOSED
> and PASSED.
>
> Thx to all testers!
>
> On Apr 5, 2012, at 8:24 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> > The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.2 can be found
> > at the usual place:
> >
> > http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
> >
> > I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.2 GA.
> > NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life
> > easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part
> > of the official release.
> >
> > [ ] +1: Good to go
> > [ ] +0: meh
> > [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why.
> >
> > Vote will last the normal 72 hrs.
> >
>
>
--
Igor Galić
Tel: +43 (0) 664 886 22 883
Mail: i.galic@brainsware.org
URL: http://brainsware.org/
GPG: 6880 4155 74BD FD7C B515 2EA5 4B1D 9E08 A097 C9AE
[RESULT] Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.2 as GA
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@apache.org>.
With 3+ +1 (binding) votes and no -1s, I call the vote CLOSED
and PASSED.
Thx to all testers!
On Apr 5, 2012, at 8:24 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.2 can be found
> at the usual place:
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
>
> I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.2 GA.
> NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life
> easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part
> of the official release.
>
> [ ] +1: Good to go
> [ ] +0: meh
> [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why.
>
> Vote will last the normal 72 hrs.
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.2 as GA
Posted by Rainer Jung <ra...@kippdata.de>.
On 05.04.2012 14:24, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.2 can be found
> at the usual place:
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
>
> I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.2 GA.
> NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life
> easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part
> of the official release.
>
> [X] +1: Good to go
> [ ] +0: meh
> [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why.
>
> Vote will last the normal 72 hrs.
+1 for GA
Test Details:
- Sigs and hashes OK
- contents of tarballs identical
- contents of tag and tarballs identical
except for expected deltas
(we could cleanup some m4 files in apr-util/xml/expat/conftools
at the end of buildconf, no regression)
Built on
- Solaris 8+10 Sparc as 32 Bit Binaries
- SLES 10 (32/64 Bits)
- SLES 11 (64 Bits)
- RHEL 5 and 6 (64 Bits)
- with default (shared) and static modules
- with module sets none, few, most, all, reallyall and default
(always mod_privileges disabled)
- using --enable-load-all-modules
- against "included" APR/APU from deps tarball and
external APR/APU 1.4.6/1.4.1
- using external libraries
- expat 2.1.0
- pcre 8.30
- openssl 1.0.1
- lua 5.2.0
- distcache 1.5.1
- libxml2 2.7.8-1
- Tool chain:
- platform gcc except for Solaris
(gcc 4.1.2 for Solaris 8 and 4.6.2 for Solaris 10)
- CFLAGS: -O2 -g -Wall -fno-strict-aliasing
(and -mpcu=v9 on Solaris)
All builds succeeded except for
- SLES 10 many static builds stop with error or crash during
linking httpd IMHO because of too many commandline params
(not a regression)
- with "reallyall", "all" or "most" modules
Tested for
- Solaris 8+10 (32), SLES 10 (32/64), SLES 11 (64), RHEL 5+6 (64)
- MPMs prefork, worker, event (except for Solaris 8 - no event)
- default (shared) and static modules
- log levels info, debug and trace8
- module set reallyall
All Tests passed with the following exceptions:
a Test 5 in t/modules/dav.t:
4 out of 222 tested builds had the "created" time after
the "modified" time.
This seems to be a platform issue, all tests done on NFS,
many tested on virtualized guests.
b Test 8 in t/ssl/pr12355.t:
Of the more than 200 runs there was one that failed this test,
(on SLES 10). 60000 bytes were posted, but only 49126 bytes received
(a little less than 48K). Not reproducible, very rare.
PR 12355 is: POST incompatible w/ renegotiate https: connection
Both are not regressions (observed for 2.4.1 as well), are not strictly
reproducible and at least b is extremely rare.
Rainer
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.2 as GA
Posted by Igor Galić <i....@brainsware.org>.
----- Original Message -----
> The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.2 can be found
> at the usual place:
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
>
> I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.2 GA.
> NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life
> easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part
> of the official release.
>
> [x] +1: Good to go
> [ ] +0: meh
> [ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why.
>
> Vote will last the normal 72 hrs.
>
Fedora 16/amd64. apr $latest stable.
Works fine with PHP, too.
i
--
Igor Galić
Tel: +43 (0) 664 886 22 883
Mail: i.galic@brainsware.org
URL: http://brainsware.org/
GPG: 6880 4155 74BD FD7C B515 2EA5 4B1D 9E08 A097 C9AE
[VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.2 as GA
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.2 can be found
at the usual place:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
I'm calling a VOTE on releasing these as Apache httpd 2.4.2 GA.
NOTE: The -deps tarballs are included here *only* to make life
easier for the tester. They will not be, and are not, part
of the official release.
[ ] +1: Good to go
[ ] +0: meh
[ ] -1: Danger Will Robinson. And why.
Vote will last the normal 72 hrs.
Re: T&R of 2.4.2 this week.
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
I'll be T&Ring 2.4.2 this afternoon (eastern).
On Apr 3, 2012, at 10:05 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> I'd like to T&R 2.4.2 this week in hopes of doing the actual
> release early next week...
>
> Comments?
>
Re: 2.4.2 Windows still beta.
Posted by Mario Brandt <jb...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
>> Noticed (no discuss) that AccepFilter https none is still broken.
> At the very least we are no longer holding the rest of the
> 2.4.x community hostage (by delaying releases) because of
> Windows issues :/
I realy understand Steffens point. But 2.4.1 with that issue is
already released. I think it is a good idea to release 2.4.2 even if
that is not solved yet like done with 2.4.1. And I also think that
Steffen means that it is not a show stopper for 2.4.2. The other stuff
is running well on windows like on the other OSs.
> We used to have access to Microsoft test environs, etc... maybe
> we need to see if we can still have that happen. I might ping
> Gianugo and see if we can get some MS support here.
That would be great if you can get some help there. There will be
windows tester if you offer a patch for testing :-)
Cheers
Mario
Re: 2.4.2 Windows still beta.
Posted by Igor Galić <i....@brainsware.org>.
Putting Gav on CC, because Joes told me to talk to him.
----- Original Message -----
> I'm not sure how to resolve this... there are only a handful of
> people who have ever hacked on the Windows stuff and they all
> seem pre-occupied w/ other issues. Yeah, it bothers me, but
> I don't know what can be done.
>
> At the very least we are no longer holding the rest of the
> 2.4.x community hostage (by delaying releases) because of
> Windows issues :/
>
> We used to have access to Microsoft test environs, etc... maybe
> we need to see if we can still have that happen. I might ping
> Gianugo and see if we can get some MS support here.
http://ci.apache.org/
* bb-2008: Windows 2008 (Standard) Server (VM run on Nyx VMware Server)
* bb-win7: Windows 7 Ultimate (VM run on Nyx VMware Server)
The question is: What kind of compiler suite do we have
installed on those machines (if any).
How fast can we get a build up and running?
Who can help? When? To get it up to speed?
Volunteers?
i
--
Igor Galić
Tel: +43 (0) 664 886 22 883
Mail: i.galic@brainsware.org
URL: http://brainsware.org/
GPG: 6880 4155 74BD FD7C B515 2EA5 4B1D 9E08 A097 C9AE
Re: 2.4.2 Windows still beta.
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
I'm not sure how to resolve this... there are only a handful of
people who have ever hacked on the Windows stuff and they all
seem pre-occupied w/ other issues. Yeah, it bothers me, but
I don't know what can be done.
At the very least we are no longer holding the rest of the
2.4.x community hostage (by delaying releases) because of
Windows issues :/
We used to have access to Microsoft test environs, etc... maybe
we need to see if we can still have that happen. I might ping
Gianugo and see if we can get some MS support here.
On Apr 4, 2012, at 10:02 AM, Steffen wrote:
> Noticed (no discuss) that AccepFilter https none is still broken.
>
> No problem here, can use IIS or 2.2 in front to have SSL.
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Jim Jagielski Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2012 4:05 PM Newsgroups: gmane.comp.apache.devel To: dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: T&R of 2.4.2 this week.
>
> I'd like to T&R 2.4.2 this week in hopes of doing the actual
> release early next week...
>
> Comments?
>
2.4.2 Windows still beta.
Posted by Steffen <in...@apachelounge.com>.
Noticed (no discuss) that AccepFilter https none is still broken.
No problem here, can use IIS or 2.2 in front to have SSL.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Jagielski
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2012 4:05 PM Newsgroups: gmane.comp.apache.devel
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: T&R of 2.4.2 this week.
I'd like to T&R 2.4.2 this week in hopes of doing the actual
release early next week...
Comments?
Re: T&R of 2.4.2 this week.
Posted by Igor Galić <i....@brainsware.org>.
----- Original Message -----
>
> I'd like to T&R 2.4.2 this week in hopes of doing the actual
> release early next week...
>
> Comments?
Considering how empty STATUS is, I'd say go for it!
i
--
Igor Galić
Tel: +43 (0) 664 886 22 883
Mail: i.galic@brainsware.org
URL: http://brainsware.org/
GPG: 6880 4155 74BD FD7C B515 2EA5 4B1D 9E08 A097 C9AE
T&R of 2.4.2 this week.
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
I'd like to T&R 2.4.2 this week in hopes of doing the actual
release early next week...
Comments?
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
Thx!
And applied!
On Apr 3, 2012, at 9:14 AM, Igor Galić wrote:
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> There's just 1 more backport left in the list, and its missing
>> just 1 more +1...
>
> Done
>
>> On Mar 14, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>
>>> In the attempts to keep the momentum going, I'd like to push for
>>> a httpd 2.4.2 release Real Soon Now.
>>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Igor Galić
>
> Tel: +43 (0) 664 886 22 883
> Mail: i.galic@brainsware.org
> URL: http://brainsware.org/
> GPG: 6880 4155 74BD FD7C B515 2EA5 4B1D 9E08 A097 C9AE
>
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Igor Galić <i....@brainsware.org>.
----- Original Message -----
> There's just 1 more backport left in the list, and its missing
> just 1 more +1...
Done
> On Mar 14, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> > In the attempts to keep the momentum going, I'd like to push for
> > a httpd 2.4.2 release Real Soon Now.
> >
>
>
--
Igor Galić
Tel: +43 (0) 664 886 22 883
Mail: i.galic@brainsware.org
URL: http://brainsware.org/
GPG: 6880 4155 74BD FD7C B515 2EA5 4B1D 9E08 A097 C9AE
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@apache.org>.
There's just 1 more backport left in the list, and its missing
just 1 more +1...
On Mar 14, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> In the attempts to keep the momentum going, I'd like to push for
> a httpd 2.4.2 release Real Soon Now.
>
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Gregg Smith <gl...@gknw.net>.
Bill, not that pages are not showing up, the only problem with
AcceptFilter data has been the AcceptEx error/becoming unresponsive. I
admit to never suggesting trying AcceptFilter connect. Of course, the
problem is on the https side so I never tell them to go to "none" for
https.
I leave mine at the default (data) for https, have a script that
monitors the error log and sends a graceful restart when it detects a
new AcceptEx error. I do not think I have ever recieved a blank/partial
page with the default.
If you have a patch, I'll be glad to patch 2.4 head and try it out.
On 3/15/2012 4:13 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> Gregg, I believe these overrides are either not needed at all, or are
> not needed in specific cases, and have yet to determine which is the
> case that the users are experiencing.
>
> Is anyone complaining about AcceptFilter data or connection? If not,
> then these lines of code simply need to be dodged for AcceptFilter none.
>
> On 3/15/2012 6:06 AM, Gregg Smith wrote:
>> Bill,
>>
>> Us Windows folk would be ecstatic! It is affecting a few noisy users, then there's the
>> silent masses :)
>> Not sure what APR quirks, refresh my memory.
>> I'm +1 for a APU 1.4.2 also, crypto not building for static lib throws a decent sized
>> monkey wrench into the httpd build. Then maybe we can connect the dots in the .dsw files
>> and in makefile.win (which you have started sort of).
>>
>> Gregg
>>
>> On 3/14/2012 10:29 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
>>> On 3/14/2012 2:36 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>>> In the attempts to keep the momentum going, I'd like to push for
>>>> a httpd 2.4.2 release Real Soon Now.
>>> Then this afternoon I'll propose a 'really small patch' around
>>> 'the win32 issue' and ask folks who have had problems, and those who
>>> have not, to test it out. It appears MSDN documentation was not our
>>> friend and their directives were misplaced, and the patch should drop
>>> some code (not used back in 2.2) which might be the underlying cause
>>> of Steffan and crew's issues.
>>>
>>> We would probably hear back within the day, so windows folks would
>>> be very happy with a T&R sometime Friday-Monday. I just can't recall
>>> offhand if all the win32 quirks in apr were resolved in 1.4.6, or
>>> a new T&R is still needed on that side?
>>>
>>
>
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Gregg, I believe these overrides are either not needed at all, or are
not needed in specific cases, and have yet to determine which is the
case that the users are experiencing.
Is anyone complaining about AcceptFilter data or connection? If not,
then these lines of code simply need to be dodged for AcceptFilter none.
On 3/15/2012 6:06 AM, Gregg Smith wrote:
> Bill,
>
> Us Windows folk would be ecstatic! It is affecting a few noisy users, then there's the
> silent masses :)
> Not sure what APR quirks, refresh my memory.
> I'm +1 for a APU 1.4.2 also, crypto not building for static lib throws a decent sized
> monkey wrench into the httpd build. Then maybe we can connect the dots in the .dsw files
> and in makefile.win (which you have started sort of).
>
> Gregg
>
> On 3/14/2012 10:29 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
>> On 3/14/2012 2:36 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>> In the attempts to keep the momentum going, I'd like to push for
>>> a httpd 2.4.2 release Real Soon Now.
>> Then this afternoon I'll propose a 'really small patch' around
>> 'the win32 issue' and ask folks who have had problems, and those who
>> have not, to test it out. It appears MSDN documentation was not our
>> friend and their directives were misplaced, and the patch should drop
>> some code (not used back in 2.2) which might be the underlying cause
>> of Steffan and crew's issues.
>>
>> We would probably hear back within the day, so windows folks would
>> be very happy with a T&R sometime Friday-Monday. I just can't recall
>> offhand if all the win32 quirks in apr were resolved in 1.4.6, or
>> a new T&R is still needed on that side?
>>
>
>
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Mar 15, 2012, at 7:06 AM, Gregg Smith wrote:
> Bill,
>
> Us Windows folk would be ecstatic! It is affecting a few noisy users, then there's the silent masses :)
> Not sure what APR quirks, refresh my memory.
> I'm +1 for a APU 1.4.2 also, crypto not building for static lib throws a decent sized monkey wrench into the httpd build. Then maybe we can connect the dots in the .dsw files and in makefile.win (which you have started sort of).
>
+1 for APU 1.4.2 (adding APR to this thread)... I can RM if need be.
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Mar 15, 2012, at 7:06 AM, Gregg Smith wrote:
> Bill,
>
> Us Windows folk would be ecstatic! It is affecting a few noisy users, then there's the silent masses :)
> Not sure what APR quirks, refresh my memory.
> I'm +1 for a APU 1.4.2 also, crypto not building for static lib throws a decent sized monkey wrench into the httpd build. Then maybe we can connect the dots in the .dsw files and in makefile.win (which you have started sort of).
>
+1 for APU 1.4.2 (adding APR to this thread)... I can RM if need be.
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Gregg Smith <gl...@gknw.net>.
Graham,
Current APU 1.4 head builds fine.
It looks like your fix for this is the only thing in changes.
On 3/15/2012 4:13 AM, Graham Leggett wrote:
> On 15 Mar 2012, at 1:06 PM, Gregg Smith wrote:
>
>> Us Windows folk would be ecstatic! It is affecting a few noisy users, then there's the silent masses :)
>> Not sure what APR quirks, refresh my memory.
>> I'm +1 for a APU 1.4.2 also, crypto not building for static lib throws a decent sized monkey wrench into the httpd build. Then maybe we can connect the dots in the .dsw files and in makefile.win (which you have started sort of).
> Happy to RM an apr-util release. Am I right in understanding the issues are fixed and we're good to go?
>
> Regards,
> Graham
> --
>
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Graham Leggett <mi...@sharp.fm>.
On 15 Mar 2012, at 1:06 PM, Gregg Smith wrote:
> Us Windows folk would be ecstatic! It is affecting a few noisy users, then there's the silent masses :)
> Not sure what APR quirks, refresh my memory.
> I'm +1 for a APU 1.4.2 also, crypto not building for static lib throws a decent sized monkey wrench into the httpd build. Then maybe we can connect the dots in the .dsw files and in makefile.win (which you have started sort of).
Happy to RM an apr-util release. Am I right in understanding the issues are fixed and we're good to go?
Regards,
Graham
--
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Gregg Smith <gl...@gknw.net>.
Bill,
Us Windows folk would be ecstatic! It is affecting a few noisy users,
then there's the silent masses :)
Not sure what APR quirks, refresh my memory.
I'm +1 for a APU 1.4.2 also, crypto not building for static lib throws a
decent sized monkey wrench into the httpd build. Then maybe we can
connect the dots in the .dsw files and in makefile.win (which you have
started sort of).
Gregg
On 3/14/2012 10:29 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 3/14/2012 2:36 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> In the attempts to keep the momentum going, I'd like to push for
>> a httpd 2.4.2 release Real Soon Now.
> Then this afternoon I'll propose a 'really small patch' around
> 'the win32 issue' and ask folks who have had problems, and those who
> have not, to test it out. It appears MSDN documentation was not our
> friend and their directives were misplaced, and the patch should drop
> some code (not used back in 2.2) which might be the underlying cause
> of Steffan and crew's issues.
>
> We would probably hear back within the day, so windows folks would
> be very happy with a T&R sometime Friday-Monday. I just can't recall
> offhand if all the win32 quirks in apr were resolved in 1.4.6, or
> a new T&R is still needed on that side?
>
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Issac Goldstand <ma...@beamartyr.net>.
On 15/03/2012 07:29, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 3/14/2012 2:36 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> In the attempts to keep the momentum going, I'd like to push for
>> a httpd 2.4.2 release Real Soon Now.
> Then this afternoon I'll propose a 'really small patch' around
> 'the win32 issue' and ask folks who have had problems, and those who
> have not, to test it out. It appears MSDN documentation was not our
> friend and their directives were misplaced, and the patch should drop
> some code (not used back in 2.2) which might be the underlying cause
> of Steffan and crew's issues.
>
> We would probably hear back within the day, so windows folks would
> be very happy with a T&R sometime Friday-Monday. I just can't recall
> offhand if all the win32 quirks in apr were resolved in 1.4.6, or
> a new T&R is still needed on that side
bill++ :)
Any chance you can elaborate on "It appears MSDN documentation... etc"?
Issac
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
On 3/15/2012 4:07 AM, Issac Goldstand wrote:
>
> Any chance you can elaborate on "It appears MSDN documentation was not
> our friend... etc"?
>From MSDN and my understanding of the new wait-on-event API, it appeared
that MSDN suggested these would be defaults and we would have to adjust
for apr's assumptions (in server/mpm/winnt/child.c);
/* Restore the state corresponding to apr_os_sock_make's default
* assumption of timeout -1 (really, a flaw of os_sock_make and
* os_sock_put that it does not query to determine ->timeout).
* XXX: Upon a fix to APR, these three statements should disappear.
*/
ioctlsocket(context->accept_socket, FIONBIO, &zero);
setsockopt(context->accept_socket, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVTIMEO,
(char *) &zero, sizeof(zero));
setsockopt(context->accept_socket, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDTIMEO,
(char *) &zero, sizeof(zero));
but no, apparently this is not the case, and these can't be assumed to be
appropriate for both AcceptEx and accept style logic.
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Issac Goldstand <ma...@beamartyr.net>.
On 15/03/2012 07:29, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 3/14/2012 2:36 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> In the attempts to keep the momentum going, I'd like to push for
>> a httpd 2.4.2 release Real Soon Now.
> Then this afternoon I'll propose a 'really small patch' around
> 'the win32 issue' and ask folks who have had problems, and those who
> have not, to test it out. It appears MSDN documentation was not our
> friend and their directives were misplaced, and the patch should drop
> some code (not used back in 2.2) which might be the underlying cause
> of Steffan and crew's issues.
>
> We would probably hear back within the day, so windows folks would
> be very happy with a T&R sometime Friday-Monday. I just can't recall
> offhand if all the win32 quirks in apr were resolved in 1.4.6, or
> a new T&R is still needed on that side
bill++ :)
Any chance you can elaborate on "It appears MSDN documentation was not
our friend... etc"?
Issac
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
On 3/14/2012 2:36 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> In the attempts to keep the momentum going, I'd like to push for
> a httpd 2.4.2 release Real Soon Now.
Then this afternoon I'll propose a 'really small patch' around
'the win32 issue' and ask folks who have had problems, and those who
have not, to test it out. It appears MSDN documentation was not our
friend and their directives were misplaced, and the patch should drop
some code (not used back in 2.2) which might be the underlying cause
of Steffan and crew's issues.
We would probably hear back within the day, so windows folks would
be very happy with a T&R sometime Friday-Monday. I just can't recall
offhand if all the win32 quirks in apr were resolved in 1.4.6, or
a new T&R is still needed on that side?
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Rainer Jung <ra...@kippdata.de>.
On 25.03.2012 19:09, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> How does the week of April 2nd sound? This should provide enough time
> for the proposed backports to get enough votes and to propose
> the backports based on recent trunk improvements...
>
> Sound like a plan? I volunteer to RM.
>
> On Mar 14, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>> In the attempts to keep the momentum going, I'd like to push for
>> a httpd 2.4.2 release Real Soon Now.
+1
Rainer
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Michael Felt <ma...@gmail.com>.
Thank you for the "compliment". Quite correct I am getting used to svn and
where all of you are.
For the record, I was able to package the httpd-2.4.x using the apr-1.4.6
package generally available together with the apr-util-1.4.2 tarball in
Tarballs/zipballs are at
> http://apr.apache.org/dev/dist/autoconf-2.68+libtool-2.4.2/.
>
So, probably I am trying to mix the wrong version of apr with an ancient
apr-util.
Thank you all for the suggestions and corrections.
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 11:14 PM, William A. Rowe Jr.
<wr...@rowe-clan.net>wrote:
> On 3/25/2012 5:18 PM, Michael Felt wrote:
> > I have been trying to build trunk from "trunk" versions of apr and
> apr-util. buildconf
> > complains about not being able to find APR-util (or apr-UTIL). In any
> case, caps are
> > involved. Windows might not complain, but UNIX does.
>
> You make no sense. The trunk version of apr 2.0.0-dev includes all '-util'
> functionality. In fact, there is no apr-util 'trunk' anymore.
>
> What you might want for development are the current apr-util and apr 1.x
> branches, 1.4.x are current, and 1.5.x are 'next' if we get that far.
>
> But don't mix 2.0 apr with an apr-util at all. The merged into apr.
>
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
On 3/25/2012 5:18 PM, Michael Felt wrote:
> I have been trying to build trunk from "trunk" versions of apr and apr-util. buildconf
> complains about not being able to find APR-util (or apr-UTIL). In any case, caps are
> involved. Windows might not complain, but UNIX does.
You make no sense. The trunk version of apr 2.0.0-dev includes all '-util'
functionality. In fact, there is no apr-util 'trunk' anymore.
What you might want for development are the current apr-util and apr 1.x
branches, 1.4.x are current, and 1.5.x are 'next' if we get that far.
But don't mix 2.0 apr with an apr-util at all. The merged into apr.
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Graham Leggett <mi...@sharp.fm>.
On 26 Mar 2012, at 12:18 AM, Michael Felt wrote:
> I have been trying to build trunk from "trunk" versions of apr and apr-util. buildconf complains about not being able to find APR-util (or apr-UTIL). In any case, caps are involved. Windows might not complain, but UNIX does.
In theory, you should be able to get away with not calling buildconf at all, given that this command is run before the tarballs are created and it should all be functional from the outset. Or to put it another way, you only need to run buildconf if you checked the code out from svn, instead of trying to build from a tarball.
The ./configure script needs the base path of the apr and apr-util installations passed to it, something like this:
./configure [options] --with-apr=%{_prefix} --with-apr-util=%{_prefix}
where prefix is /opt/local (for you, as I recall).
Regards,
Graham
--
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Jeff Trawick <tr...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 6:18 PM, Michael Felt <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have been trying to build trunk from "trunk" versions of apr and apr-util.
> buildconf complains about not being able to find APR-util (or apr-UTIL). In
> any case, caps are involved. Windows might not complain, but UNIX does.
>
> To test what you are testing - should I use apr and apr-util trunks, or is
> it better "in all thinks" - i.e. including httpd-trunk builds to use the
> released versions of apr, or their trunk versions. Reading the lists I see
> many of you are involved in both projects. I just want to be in sync with
> the ways you test for new releases.
use apr 1.4.x and apr-util 1.4.x with httpd trunk or httpd 2.4.x
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Michael Felt <ma...@gmail.com>.
I have been trying to build trunk from "trunk" versions of apr and
apr-util. buildconf complains about not being able to find APR-util (or
apr-UTIL). In any case, caps are involved. Windows might not complain, but
UNIX does.
To test what you are testing - should I use apr and apr-util trunks, or is
it better "in all thinks" - i.e. including httpd-trunk builds to use the
released versions of apr, or their trunk versions. Reading the lists I see
many of you are involved in both projects. I just want to be in sync with
the ways you test for new releases.
Sincerely,
Michael
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 10:40 PM, Graham Leggett <mi...@sharp.fm> wrote:
> On 25 Mar 2012, at 7:09 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> > How does the week of April 2nd sound? This should provide enough time
> > for the proposed backports to get enough votes and to propose
> > the backports based on recent trunk improvements...
> >
> > Sound like a plan? I volunteer to RM.
>
> +1.
>
> I've just T&R'ed apr-util v1.4.2, containing some compile time fixes for
> static builds. In theory, given no drama it should be ready for April 2nd.
>
> Regards,
> Graham
> --
>
>
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Graham Leggett <mi...@sharp.fm>.
On 25 Mar 2012, at 7:09 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> How does the week of April 2nd sound? This should provide enough time
> for the proposed backports to get enough votes and to propose
> the backports based on recent trunk improvements...
>
> Sound like a plan? I volunteer to RM.
+1.
I've just T&R'ed apr-util v1.4.2, containing some compile time fixes for static builds. In theory, given no drama it should be ready for April 2nd.
Regards,
Graham
--
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Michael Felt <ma...@gmail.com>.
FYI: needs to be built separately -- httpd-2.4.2 (patched for AIX) builds
and passes configtest on AIX 4.3.3
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Graham Leggett <mi...@sharp.fm> wrote:
> On 31 Mar 2012, at 3:10 AM, Gregg Smith wrote:
>
> > I found this to be an interesting error message:
> >
> > [Fri Mar 30 18:07:41.019600 2012] [session_crypto:error] [pid 4236:tid
> 700] (100005)Error string not specified yet: AH01845: (null)
> >
> > very informative :)
>
> Can you give more details of the crypto driver you're trying to use?
>
> Using the error code "AH01845", a quick search of the source shows up this:
>
> rv = apr_crypto_get_driver(&driver, conf->library, conf->params,
> &err, p);
> ...
> if (APR_SUCCESS != rv && err) {
> ap_log_error(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_ERR, rv, s, APLOGNO(01845)
> "%s", err->msg);
> return rv;
> }
>
> It looks like the error code returned by apr_crypto_get_driver() is not
> recognised as an APR error, and the error message being printed is the
> string "(null)".
>
> This comes from here:
>
> apr_dso_error(dso, buffer, ERROR_SIZE - 1);
> err->msg = buffer;
> err->reason = modname;
>
> What this means is that an attempt to load a DSO is failing, with an
> unknown APR error code and an error message of "(null)".
>
> The assumption that the underlying driver will always return a sensible
> error message seems to be bogus, this won't help with the message, but will
> in theory give a hint to the driver involved:
>
> Index: modules/session/mod_session_crypto.c
> ===================================================================
> --- modules/session/mod_session_crypto.c (revision 1307617)
> +++ modules/session/mod_session_crypto.c (working copy)
> @@ -435,7 +435,7 @@
> }
> if (APR_SUCCESS != rv && err) {
> ap_log_error(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_ERR, rv, s, APLOGNO(01845)
> - "%s", err->msg);
> + "The crypto library '%s' could not be loaded: %s
> (%s)", conf->library, err->msg, err->reason);
> return rv;
> }
> if (APR_ENOTIMPL == rv) {
>
> Can you confirm?
>
> Regards,
> Graham
> --
>
>
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Tim Bannister <is...@jellybaby.net>.
With the code:
> if (APR_SUCCESS != rv&& err) {
> ap_log_error(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_ERR, rv, s, APLOGNO(01845)
> "%s", err->msg);
> return rv;
> }
then 01845 gets associated with lots of different crypto driver messages.
How about logging something like "crypto driver error: %s" instead?
--
Tim Bannister – isoma@jellybaby.net
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Gregg Smith <gl...@gknw.net>.
On 3/31/2012 12:44 PM, Graham Leggett wrote:
> On 31 Mar 2012, at 7:25 PM, Gregg Smith wrote:
>
>> It was nss and I was pulling away nss dll files to see just what was needed and what wasn't. Interesting was that the error was different for most but that error came up for some. The other was
>>
>> [Fri Mar 30 18:12:05.018600 2012] [session_crypto:error] [pid 3404:tid 700] (OS 126)The specified module could not be found. : AH01845: The specified module could not be found.
>>
>> This does give better info
>> [Sat Mar 31 10:15:59.017600 2012] [session_crypto:error] [pid 4932:tid 700] (100005)Error string not specified yet: AH01845: The crypto library 'nss' could not be loaded: (null) (Error during 'nss' initialisation)
>>
>> Maybe however, "Error string not specified by the driver yet" or something to that effect? It cannot be incorrectly read as "we're not sure what to say here yet," as I embarrassingly did.
> The string "Error string not specified yet" belongs to APR, and is returned if an error code (in this case
> 100005) isn't recognised by apr_error_string().
>
> If it's nss, then the following code is generating the error:
>
> if (s != SECSuccess) {
> if (result) {
> apu_err_t *err = apr_pcalloc(pool, sizeof(apu_err_t));
> err->rc = PR_GetError();
> err->msg = PR_ErrorToName(s);
> err->reason = "Error during 'nss' initialisation";
> *result = err;
> }
> return APR_ECRYPT;
> }
>
> In turn, it means that PR_ErrorToName(s) is returning the string "(null)".
>
> It may be worth logging the value err->rc as well to see the value of the NSS error. When I developed this stuff way back when I discovered a number of places where NSS errors were either missing or were duplicated (ie multiple failures mapped to the same error code). When the errors were pointed out, the NSS guys were very quick to fix the problems. Are you using a recent version of NSS?
3.13.3, Feb. 22, 2012
Regards,
Gregg
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Graham Leggett <mi...@sharp.fm>.
On 31 Mar 2012, at 7:25 PM, Gregg Smith wrote:
> It was nss and I was pulling away nss dll files to see just what was needed and what wasn't. Interesting was that the error was different for most but that error came up for some. The other was
>
> [Fri Mar 30 18:12:05.018600 2012] [session_crypto:error] [pid 3404:tid 700] (OS 126)The specified module could not be found. : AH01845: The specified module could not be found.
>
> This does give better info
> [Sat Mar 31 10:15:59.017600 2012] [session_crypto:error] [pid 4932:tid 700] (100005)Error string not specified yet: AH01845: The crypto library 'nss' could not be loaded: (null) (Error during 'nss' initialisation)
>
> Maybe however, "Error string not specified by the driver yet" or something to that effect? It cannot be incorrectly read as "we're not sure what to say here yet," as I embarrassingly did.
The string "Error string not specified yet" belongs to APR, and is returned if an error code (in this case
100005) isn't recognised by apr_error_string().
If it's nss, then the following code is generating the error:
if (s != SECSuccess) {
if (result) {
apu_err_t *err = apr_pcalloc(pool, sizeof(apu_err_t));
err->rc = PR_GetError();
err->msg = PR_ErrorToName(s);
err->reason = "Error during 'nss' initialisation";
*result = err;
}
return APR_ECRYPT;
}
In turn, it means that PR_ErrorToName(s) is returning the string "(null)".
It may be worth logging the value err->rc as well to see the value of the NSS error. When I developed this stuff way back when I discovered a number of places where NSS errors were either missing or were duplicated (ie multiple failures mapped to the same error code). When the errors were pointed out, the NSS guys were very quick to fix the problems. Are you using a recent version of NSS?
Index: modules/session/mod_session_crypto.c
===================================================================
--- modules/session/mod_session_crypto.c (revision 1307617)
+++ modules/session/mod_session_crypto.c (working copy)
@@ -435,7 +435,7 @@
}
if (APR_SUCCESS != rv && err) {
ap_log_error(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_ERR, rv, s, APLOGNO(01845)
- "%s", err->msg);
+ "The crypto library '%s' could not be loaded: %s (%s: %d)", conf->library, err->msg, err->reason, err->rc);
return rv;
}
if (APR_ENOTIMPL == rv) {
Regards,
Graham
--
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Gregg Smith <gl...@gknw.net>.
Hi Graham,
I know I should have elaborated more but I was very short on time at
that moment. It was a missing dependency.
It was nss and I was pulling away nss dll files to see just what was
needed and what wasn't. Interesting was that the error was different for
most but that error came up for some. The other was
[Fri Mar 30 18:12:05.018600 2012] [session_crypto:error] [pid 3404:tid
700] (OS 126)The specified module could not be found. : AH01845: The
specified module could not be found.
This does give better info
[Sat Mar 31 10:15:59.017600 2012] [session_crypto:error] [pid 4932:tid
700] (100005)Error string not specified yet: AH01845: The crypto library
'nss' could not be loaded: (null) (Error during 'nss' initialisation)
Maybe however, "Error string not specified by the driver yet" or
something to that effect? It cannot be incorrectly read as "we're not
sure what to say here yet," as I embarrassingly did.
Regards,
Gregg
On 3/31/2012 5:33 AM, Graham Leggett wrote:
> On 31 Mar 2012, at 3:10 AM, Gregg Smith wrote:
>
>> I found this to be an interesting error message:
>>
>> [Fri Mar 30 18:07:41.019600 2012] [session_crypto:error] [pid 4236:tid 700] (100005)Error string not specified yet: AH01845: (null)
>>
>> very informative :)
> Can you give more details of the crypto driver you're trying to use?
>
> Using the error code "AH01845", a quick search of the source shows up this:
>
> rv = apr_crypto_get_driver(&driver, conf->library, conf->params,&err, p);
> ...
> if (APR_SUCCESS != rv&& err) {
> ap_log_error(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_ERR, rv, s, APLOGNO(01845)
> "%s", err->msg);
> return rv;
> }
>
> It looks like the error code returned by apr_crypto_get_driver() is not recognised as an APR error, and the error message being printed is the string "(null)".
>
> This comes from here:
>
> apr_dso_error(dso, buffer, ERROR_SIZE - 1);
> err->msg = buffer;
> err->reason = modname;
>
> What this means is that an attempt to load a DSO is failing, with an unknown APR error code and an error message of "(null)".
>
> The assumption that the underlying driver will always return a sensible error message seems to be bogus, this won't help with the message, but will in theory give a hint to the driver involved:
>
> Index: modules/session/mod_session_crypto.c
> ===================================================================
> --- modules/session/mod_session_crypto.c (revision 1307617)
> +++ modules/session/mod_session_crypto.c (working copy)
> @@ -435,7 +435,7 @@
> }
> if (APR_SUCCESS != rv&& err) {
> ap_log_error(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_ERR, rv, s, APLOGNO(01845)
> - "%s", err->msg);
> + "The crypto library '%s' could not be loaded: %s (%s)", conf->library, err->msg, err->reason);
> return rv;
> }
> if (APR_ENOTIMPL == rv) {
>
> Can you confirm?
>
> Regards,
> Graham
> --
>
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Graham Leggett <mi...@sharp.fm>.
On 31 Mar 2012, at 3:10 AM, Gregg Smith wrote:
> I found this to be an interesting error message:
>
> [Fri Mar 30 18:07:41.019600 2012] [session_crypto:error] [pid 4236:tid 700] (100005)Error string not specified yet: AH01845: (null)
>
> very informative :)
Can you give more details of the crypto driver you're trying to use?
Using the error code "AH01845", a quick search of the source shows up this:
rv = apr_crypto_get_driver(&driver, conf->library, conf->params, &err, p);
...
if (APR_SUCCESS != rv && err) {
ap_log_error(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_ERR, rv, s, APLOGNO(01845)
"%s", err->msg);
return rv;
}
It looks like the error code returned by apr_crypto_get_driver() is not recognised as an APR error, and the error message being printed is the string "(null)".
This comes from here:
apr_dso_error(dso, buffer, ERROR_SIZE - 1);
err->msg = buffer;
err->reason = modname;
What this means is that an attempt to load a DSO is failing, with an unknown APR error code and an error message of "(null)".
The assumption that the underlying driver will always return a sensible error message seems to be bogus, this won't help with the message, but will in theory give a hint to the driver involved:
Index: modules/session/mod_session_crypto.c
===================================================================
--- modules/session/mod_session_crypto.c (revision 1307617)
+++ modules/session/mod_session_crypto.c (working copy)
@@ -435,7 +435,7 @@
}
if (APR_SUCCESS != rv && err) {
ap_log_error(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_ERR, rv, s, APLOGNO(01845)
- "%s", err->msg);
+ "The crypto library '%s' could not be loaded: %s (%s)", conf->library, err->msg, err->reason);
return rv;
}
if (APR_ENOTIMPL == rv) {
Can you confirm?
Regards,
Graham
--
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Gregg Smith <gl...@gknw.net>.
I found this to be an interesting error message:
[Fri Mar 30 18:07:41.019600 2012] [session_crypto:error] [pid 4236:tid
700] (100005)Error string not specified yet: AH01845: (null)
very informative :)
Gregg
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Michael Felt <ma...@gmail.com>.
it is just 2.4.2 on aix 4.3.3 - not real important I expect. Worthy of a
mention at least.
No to find where this routine is defined. Try again with apr-1.4.x then,
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 9:06 PM, Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I was curious - so I tried to build 2.4.2 on AIX 4.3.3 (still use that
> > version of AIX to host http://rootvg.net - I do not own it, just help)
> but
> > ran into a problem.
>
> There is not yet a 2.4.2, and your issue is probably best served by
> creating a dedicated thread rather than using this one intended to
> prep for 2.4.2, until/unless you think it's a new blocker.
>
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com>.
> I was curious - so I tried to build 2.4.2 on AIX 4.3.3 (still use that
> version of AIX to host http://rootvg.net - I do not own it, just help) but
> ran into a problem.
There is not yet a 2.4.2, and your issue is probably best served by
creating a dedicated thread rather than using this one intended to
prep for 2.4.2, until/unless you think it's a new blocker.
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Michael Felt <ma...@gmail.com>.
OK. Thanks.
I was curious - so I tried to build 2.4.2 on AIX 4.3.3 (still use that
version of AIX to host http://rootvg.net - I do not own it, just help) but
ran into a problem.
apr/apr-util 1.5.0 compiled and installed fine, as did pcre (8.30 I
believe). However, have a problem in the support area...
(ld): lib /usr/lib/librtl.a
LIBRARY: Shared object libaprutil.so: 280 symbols imported.
LIBRARY: Shared object libexpat.a[libexpat.so.0]: 77 symbols imported.
LIBRARY: Shared object libiconv.a[shr4.o]: 10 symbols imported.
LIBRARY: Shared object libiconv.a[shr.o]: 11 symbols imported.
LIBRARY: Shared object libapr.so: 471 symbols imported.
LIBRARY: Shared object libpthread.a[shr_comm.o]: 109 symbols imported.
LIBRARY: Shared object libpthread.a[shr_xpg5.o]: 123 symbols imported.
LIBRARY: Shared object libc_r.a[shr.o]: 2269 symbols imported.
LIBRARY: Shared object libc_r.a[meth.o]: 2 symbols imported.
LIBRARY: Shared object libc_r.a[aio.o]: 11 symbols imported.
LIBRARY: Shared object libc_r.a[pse.o]: 78 symbols imported.
LIBRARY: Shared object libc_r.a[dl.o]: 4 symbols imported.
LIBRARY: Shared object libc_r.a[pty.o]: 1 symbols imported.
LIBRARY: Shared object librtl.a[shr.o]: 1 symbols imported.
LIBRARY: Shared object librtl.a[lazy42.o]: 3 symbols imported.
FILELIST: Number of previously inserted files processed: 13
(ld): exports /usr/lib/libg.exp
EXPORTS: Symbols exported: 4
(ld): initfini _GLOBAL__FI_htpasswd _GLOBAL__FD_htpasswd
(ld): keep XML_Parse
(ld): resolve
RESOLVE: 274 of 4655 symbols were kept.
(ld): addgl /usr/lib/glink.o
ADDGL: Glink code added for 43 symbols.
(ld): er full
ld: 0711-318 ERROR: Undefined symbols were found.
The following symbols are in error:
Symbol Inpndx TY CL Source-File(Object-File) OR
Import-File{Shared-object}
RLD: Address Section Rld-type Referencing
Symbol
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ld: 0711-317 ERROR: Undefined symbol: .apr_generate_random_bytes
.apr_generate_random_bytes [46] ER PR htpasswd.c(htpasswd.o)
0000001c .text R_RBR [527]
<.seed_rand>
ER: The return code is 8.
collect2: ld returned 8 exit status
Suggestions?
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You can choose whatever external expat you like when you configure
> apr-util.
>
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com>.
You can choose whatever external expat you like when you configure apr-util.
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Michael Felt <ma...@gmail.com>.
p.s. just checked the apr-util-2.5.x/xml/expat/README - and it is the same
README file.
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:52 PM, Michael Felt <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Looking for expat I see both in svn for apr-util as well as in the tarball
> released for public viewing to following info in the
> <projectname>/xml/expat/README file:
>
> Expat, Release 1.95.7
>
> This is Expat, a C library for parsing XML, written by James Clark.
> Expat is a stream-oriented XML parser. This means that you register
> ...
>
> Does not look like the new version is being used by apr-util. Or am I
> still "not making any sense"? ;)
>
> In other words, where should I find the new version of expat to test
> (build) against?
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Graham Leggett <mi...@sharp.fm> wrote:
>
>> On 25 Mar 2012, at 7:09 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>
>> > How does the week of April 2nd sound? This should provide enough time
>> > for the proposed backports to get enough votes and to propose
>> > the backports based on recent trunk improvements...
>> >
>> > Sound like a plan? I volunteer to RM.
>>
>> Quick reminder that apr-util v1.4.2 is up for vote, and would fix some
>> issues for httpd people. It would be good to get the apr-util vote
>> concluded before httpd v2.4.2 goes out the door.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Graham
>> --
>>
>>
>
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Michael Felt <ma...@gmail.com>.
Looking for expat I see both in svn for apr-util as well as in the tarball
released for public viewing to following info in the
<projectname>/xml/expat/README file:
Expat, Release 1.95.7
This is Expat, a C library for parsing XML, written by James Clark.
Expat is a stream-oriented XML parser. This means that you register
...
Does not look like the new version is being used by apr-util. Or am I still
"not making any sense"? ;)
In other words, where should I find the new version of expat to test
(build) against?
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Graham Leggett <mi...@sharp.fm> wrote:
> On 25 Mar 2012, at 7:09 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> > How does the week of April 2nd sound? This should provide enough time
> > for the proposed backports to get enough votes and to propose
> > the backports based on recent trunk improvements...
> >
> > Sound like a plan? I volunteer to RM.
>
> Quick reminder that apr-util v1.4.2 is up for vote, and would fix some
> issues for httpd people. It would be good to get the apr-util vote
> concluded before httpd v2.4.2 goes out the door.
>
> Regards,
> Graham
> --
>
>
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Graham Leggett <mi...@sharp.fm>.
On 25 Mar 2012, at 7:09 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> How does the week of April 2nd sound? This should provide enough time
> for the proposed backports to get enough votes and to propose
> the backports based on recent trunk improvements...
>
> Sound like a plan? I volunteer to RM.
Quick reminder that apr-util v1.4.2 is up for vote, and would fix some issues for httpd people. It would be good to get the apr-util vote concluded before httpd v2.4.2 goes out the door.
Regards,
Graham
--
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
How does the week of April 2nd sound? This should provide enough time
for the proposed backports to get enough votes and to propose
the backports based on recent trunk improvements...
Sound like a plan? I volunteer to RM.
On Mar 14, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> In the attempts to keep the momentum going, I'd like to push for
> a httpd 2.4.2 release Real Soon Now.
>
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
On 3/27/2012 7:22 AM, Steffen wrote:
> A new expat 2.1.0 is available, like to see it also included in apr and test
> with 2.4.2.
Excellent news! Of course OpenSSL 1.0.1 has since been released. I'm likely
to get to a quick test build Thursday, so that if there is breakage we can do
something about it, before Jim's T&R next week.
Re: http-mpm.conf.in versus docs and defaults
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
On Mar 28, 2012, at 1:34 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> Being a new committer and, basically, just a documentation committer, I feel that I must bring this before the dev@ list before proceeding any further. There appears to be a mismatch between the mpm defaults in the configuration and the documentation surrounding it as well as the header definitions. An example is the worker and event mpm, where the configuration defines them so:
>
> StartServers 2
> MinSpareThreads 25
> MaxSpareThreads 75
> ThreadsPerChild 25
> MaxRequestWorkers 150
>
> However, in both the documentation and the headers, these values can be read or calculated as:
>
> StartServers 3
> MinSpareThreads 75
> MaxSpareThreads 250
> ThreadsPerChild 25
> MaxRequestWorkers 400
>
> From what I can gather with my IRC chats with Igor Galic, this has been discussed quite a while back, and the consensus was to adopt these new values as default, but somehow it did not make it to the http-mpm.conf.in file.
> I have been asked to change the values in the conf.in file, but I'm very unsure if it is merited, so I therefor ask you, oh great people of the dev@ list, to give me an answer as to whether these new values should be adopted or not. The current stance we have taken in discussions regarding these values is that there is a difference between default configuration value and the default values hard-coded into the server, but it can seem a bit silly to use that explanation at times.
My opinion on this is that the default shipped configuration file should match the in-code default values.
Some of the out-of-sync default config file values are historic, others are simply errors. In either case, they should be brought into sync with the built-in defaults.
So, yeah, do it.
--Rich (One voice among many)
http-mpm.conf.in versus docs and defaults
Posted by Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk>.
Being a new committer and, basically, just a documentation committer, I
feel that I must bring this before the dev@ list before proceeding any
further. There appears to be a mismatch between the mpm defaults in the
configuration and the documentation surrounding it as well as the header
definitions. An example is the worker and event mpm, where the
configuration defines them so:
StartServers 2
MinSpareThreads 25
MaxSpareThreads 75
ThreadsPerChild 25
MaxRequestWorkers 150
However, in both the documentation and the headers, these values can be
read or calculated as:
StartServers 3
MinSpareThreads 75
MaxSpareThreads 250
ThreadsPerChild 25
MaxRequestWorkers 400
From what I can gather with my IRC chats with Igor Galic, this has been
discussed quite a while back, and the consensus was to adopt these new
values as default, but somehow it did not make it to the
http-mpm.conf.in file.
I have been asked to change the values in the conf.in file, but I'm very
unsure if it is merited, so I therefor ask you, oh great people of the
dev@ list, to give me an answer as to whether these new values should be
adopted or not. The current stance we have taken in discussions
regarding these values is that there is a difference between default
configuration value and the default values hard-coded into the server,
but it can seem a bit silly to use that explanation at times.
With regards,
Daniel.
Re: A push for 2.4.2
Posted by Steffen <in...@apachelounge.com>.
A new expat 2.1.0 is available, like to see it also included in apr and test
with 2.4.2.
Bill was waiting for it:
From: "William A. Rowe Jr."
Date: 2012-03-08 20:27:25
Nor am I (aware of issues), however expat 2.0.1 has vulnerabilites which
are corrected in the expat project's svn but not in a 'release' (we have
a patched flavor of 1.9.5 in apr project's repository). We won't ship the
apr 1.4.6 +patch, but would wait for apr to release again. OpenSSL is
about to deliver 1.0.1 (and then deprecate 1.0.0 long before we finish any
httpd 2.4 cycle) so waiting the additional week or few for the brand new
openssl 1.0.1 and a new apr tag (and a new expat 2.0.2 would really be
lovely).
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Jagielski
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 8:36 PM Newsgroups: gmane.comp.apache.devel
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: A push for 2.4.2
In the attempts to keep the momentum going, I'd like to push for
a httpd 2.4.2 release Real Soon Now.