httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ben Laurie <...@gonzo.ben.algroup.co.uk>
Subject Re: Lattest list of patches & my votes
Date Sun, 17 Sep 1995 15:04:07 GMT
> 
> > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Here is the latest list of patches for monday's vote.  I doubt I'm going
> > > to be around a connection tommorrow to do any kind of patch work so this
> > > list should hold, unless a mojor bug is found. 
> > > 
> > > List & my votes:
> > > 
> > > 02_http_main_cleanup.0.8.13.patch	+1
> > > 04c_SCOPort.0.8.13.patch		0
> > > 05_AddDescription.0.8.13.patch		-1
> > > 05b_AddDescription.0.8.13.patch		+1
> > > 06a_bsd_next_cleanup.0.8.13.patch	+1
> > > 08_Wall_htpr.0.8.13.patch		+1
> > > 09_log_setgrpprivs.0.8.13.patch		+1
> 
> I was working othe 01a patch, there seemed to be a problem with it and how
> my server was getting very slow.  It tuned out to be the 04c patch.  I've
> not been able to figure this out why yet... so I don't think 'm gonna
> veto the patch as of yet.  I'll 04c at 0 and add:
> 
> 01a_log_config_integer_time.0.8.13.patch +1
> 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 02 .. ehh... not much to say... 
> > > 
> > > I don't have access to a unix SCO system right now so I can really test
> > > out 04c.  It compiled okay, and the code ( although a little messy ) doesn't
> > > look like would cause any serious trouble with any other system. 
> > 
> > Messy?? But seriously, if you vote 0 because you don't have SCO then
> > the SCO patches are liable not to be accepted. I assume most people don't
> > have SCO on this list, or I wouldn't have had to port it?
> 
> I will have access by the end of the week, not that I would be able to 
> support it though.  Anyway, I mean there should be ways of doing the
> patch a little cleaner, right now it's changing too other variables that
> I can't account for, and see my comments above about the slow down. I've
> a little script that hits a site and reports how fast the responces were.
> It doesn't have a cache to taint the output so... anyway I had a drop of
> 12% between a clean-0.8.13, and 0.8.13+04c. 
> 
> 
> > 
> > > 05 & 05b are both doing the same job, 05b is alot cleaner in my book. 
> > 
> > I'm glad to hear that not all my patches are "messy"   ;-)
> > 
> > > 
> > > the rest are okay here... 
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > Aram W. Mirzadeh			     http://www.qosina.com/~awm/
> > > MIS Manager	To err is human, to really screw up you need a computer.
> > > Qosina Corporation			          http://www.qosina.com/
> > > Email: awm@qosina.com				            awm@liii.com
> > 
> > My votes:
> > 
> > 02_http_main_cleanup.0.8.13.patch	0
> > 04c_SCOPort.0.8.13.patch		+1
> > 05_AddDescription.0.8.13.patch		-1
> > 05b_AddDescription.0.8.13.patch		+1
> > 06a_bsd_next_cleanup.0.8.13.patch	+1
> > 08_Wall_htpr.0.8.13.patch		+1
> > 09_log_setgrpprivs.0.8.13.patch		+1
> 
> you forgot 01a as well...

It wasn't on the list... I'll take a look.

> 
> > 
> > My problem with 02 is that h->h_name should already be a char *, so why
> > is the cast necessary? Sounds more like a bug in Linux's headers to me (or
> > the compiler).
> 
> Don't get me wrong it's a cosmetic fix, but why 0 instead of -1?

I don't know what this list's policy is regarding "unnecessary" fixes, so I
didn't want to tread on toes. The patch does no harm, it just shouldn't be
needed. Better to patch the real fault. Or patch in a comment to the effect
that the warning is erroneous.

> 
> > 
> > (SCO still produces one warning because of a similar thing ... I don't like
> > to fix warnings which are wrong!)
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > 
> > Ben.
> > 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Aram W. Mirzadeh			     http://www.qosina.com/~awm/
> MIS Manager	To err is human, to really screw up you need a computer.
> Qosina Corporation			          http://www.qosina.com/
> Email: awm@qosina.com				            awm@liii.com

-- 
Ben Laurie                  Phone: +44 (181) 994 6435
Freelance Consultant        Fax:   +44 (181) 994 6472
and Technical Director      Email: ben@algroup.co.uk (preferred)
A.L. Digital Ltd,                  benl@fear.demon.co.uk (backup)
London, England.

[Note for the paranoid: "fear" as in "Fear and Loathing
in Las Vegas", "demon" as in Demon Internet Services, a
commercial Internet access provider.]

Mime
View raw message