You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Sander Striker <st...@apache.org> on 2003/09/28 02:52:37 UTC
Tagged 2.1
Hi,
I've tagged the 2.1 tree with STRIKER_2_1_0_PRE3. Hopefully this is the
last tag before the first 2.1 release. Please give it a test run.
Tarballs are at:
http://www.apache.org/~striker/httpd-2.1.0-pre3/
Thanks,
Sander
Re: Tagged 2.1
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
At 02:16 PM 11/11/2003, Günter Knauf wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> I've tagged the 2.1 tree with STRIKER_2_1_0_PRE3. Hopefully this is the
>> last tag before the first 2.1 release. Please give it a test run.
>> Tarballs are at:
>
>> http://www.apache.org/~striker/httpd-2.1.0-pre3/
>
>now since 1.3.29 / 2.0.48 is out the door, what happens to the 2.1.0 release?
>
>a new tag which includes the diffs we had from 2.0.48-pre3 to pre4, or a new tag now from recent CVS?
CVS HEAD. That's 2.1.x
APACHE_2_0_BRANCH tracks the next forthcoming 2.0.x release.
Bill
Re: Tagged 2.1
Posted by Günter Knauf <ef...@gmx.net>.
Hi,
> I've tagged the 2.1 tree with STRIKER_2_1_0_PRE3. Hopefully this is the
> last tag before the first 2.1 release. Please give it a test run.
> Tarballs are at:
> http://www.apache.org/~striker/httpd-2.1.0-pre3/
now since 1.3.29 / 2.0.48 is out the door, what happens to the 2.1.0 release?
a new tag which includes the diffs we had from 2.0.48-pre3 to pre4, or a new tag now from recent CVS?
Guenter.
Re: Tagged 2.1
Posted by Colm MacCarthaigh <co...@stdlib.net>.
On Sun, Sep 28, 2003 at 02:52:37AM +0200, Sander Striker wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've tagged the 2.1 tree with STRIKER_2_1_0_PRE3. Hopefully this is the
> last tag before the first 2.1 release. Please give it a test run.
> Tarballs are at:
>
> http://www.apache.org/~striker/httpd-2.1.0-pre3/
It still contains the tiny bug of mine which leads to segfault in
listen.c. Setting lr = NULL on line 399 leads the the loop
closing early (see line 343) and the ap_listeners list being
nonsensed.
End result is a segfault if something is already listening on ::
on our port when httpd is started.
I know Joe Orton has it on his todo list, but here it is again
anyway;
Index: server/listen.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/httpd-2.0/server/listen.c,v
retrieving revision 1.91
diff -u -r1.91 listen.c
--- server/listen.c 25 Aug 2003 16:00:49 -0000 1.91
+++ server/listen.c 25 Aug 2003 23:18:54 -0000
@@ -395,8 +395,13 @@
ap_listeners = lr->next;
}
- /* So that previous becomes NULL in the next iteration */
- lr = NULL;
+ /* Allthough we've removed ourselves from the list,
+ * we need to make sure that the next iteration won't
+ * consider "previous" a working IPv6 '::' socket.
+ * Changing the family is enough to make sure the
+ * conditions before make_sock() fail.
+ */
+ lr->bind_addr->family = AF_INET;
continue;
}
--
Colm MacCárthaigh Public Key: colm+pgp@stdlib.net
colm@stdlib.net http://www.stdlib.net/