httpd-bugs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From bugzi...@apache.org
Subject DO NOT REPLY [Bug 38177] New: - apache-1.3.33/34: mod_log_forensic module use of assert() vs. ap_assert() introduces __eprintf() gcc-ism?
Date Sun, 08 Jan 2006 07:44:41 GMT
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38177>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38177

           Summary: apache-1.3.33/34: mod_log_forensic module use of
                    assert() vs. ap_assert() introduces __eprintf() gcc-ism?
           Product: Apache httpd-1.3
           Version: 1.3.34
          Platform: Sun
        OS/Version: Solaris
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: mod_log_forensic
        AssignedTo: bugs@httpd.apache.org
        ReportedBy: wcheung@ucsd.edu
                CC: wcheung@ucsd.edu


1) On 11/13/04, per the recommendation on the Apache website, I submitted
   the following question/bug report/patch regarding a possible problem
   with the mod_log_forensic module's use of assert() vs. ap_assert()
   under Solaris to the "apache-httpd-users" mailing list (it causes
   a "mod_log_forensic.so: symbol __eprintf: referenced symbol not found"
   error when attempting to run "httpd"):

   http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apache-httpd-users&m=110039542317294&w=2


   On 11/14/04, Joshua Slive recommended I instead submit this report to
   "apache-httpd-dev" mailing list or the Apache bugs database:

   http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apache-httpd-users&m=110045679622830&w=2


2) On 11/14/04, Jim Jagielski replied to this issue on the apache-httpd-dev
   mailing list and also proposed a more formal patch for the problem:

   http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apache-httpd-dev&m=110045758526041&w=2
   http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apache-httpd-dev&m=110045807628303&w=2


3) Jeff Trawick submitted a "+1" reply to Jim Jagielski's proposed patch
   on 11/14/04 and so did Andre Malo on 11/15/04:

   http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apache-httpd-dev&m=110045945314944&w=2
   http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apache-httpd-dev&m=110051618628764&w=2


   Since I did not see any follow-up negative responses to Jim Jagielski's
   proposed patch, I had assumed that discussing this problem on the
   developer's mailing list meant it would be included in the next
   apache-1.3.x release?


4) On 01/08/06, I compiled the latest apache-1.3.34 version (released on
   10/18/05) and I see that this issue with the mod_log_forensic.c file
   still exists so apparently this minor patch from almost a year ago
   apparently did not make it into the apache-1.3.x release cycle.

   I'm now submitting this bug report to request that it be committed
   for inclusion in the next apache-1.3.x release (whenever that occurs).


Thank you!

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org


Mime
View raw message