httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marc Slemko <ma...@znep.com>
Subject Re: Agenda for 1.2b7
Date Tue, 28 Jan 1997 17:50:38 GMT
On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:

> 
> In article <9701271900.aa15986@paris.ics.uci.edu> you wrote:
> 
> [...]
> > Should be done before 1.2b7:
> [...]
> >   * mod_rewrite is incorrectly rewriting things in 1.2b6 from 
> >     /cgi-bin/whatever?parms      to...     /http?parms
> >         Status: Jake Buchholz reported, may have to do with snprintf call.
> 
> Have I missed a CVS commit posting or why was mod_rewrite again changed?  You

It was changed along with most other things with my large buffer overflow
patch.

> know that I incorporate all changes into the official mod_rewrite distribution
> to be able to bring mod_rewrite 2.4 into Apache the next time.  Hmmm..
> 
> This time it is not nice because the changes broke mod_rewrite in the 1.2b6
> release and I received three bugreports today. And now I discovered that the
> used mod_rewrite is not my version. Instead the users used the broken one.
> Hmmmm... I would really prefer if the Apache Group will ask me to patch
> mod_rewrite.c myself so I could avoid to monitor the CVS commit messages and
> being not longer one step behind.

The problem is that if there are a dozen modules distributed with apache
and each one is maintained by someone, getting anything done is quite
difficult.  There is also the problem of conflicting release schedules.
We are _supposed_ to be getting ready for a release, which would seem to
indicate that we can't just be incorporating new versions of modules all
the time.

> 
> What is the status of the current snprintf/strncpy patches for mod_rewrite? 
> 

They were done along with the other changes between b4 and b5.  The
patches were posted at least three times to the list.  The changes made do
_not_ directly fit back into 1.1 because they need ap_snprintf.  You can
ifdef around that though I guess.  There is currently a bug as posted, and
I'm waiting for a couple of +1s to my fix before I commit it. 

I'm not trying to discourage you from maintaining the module or discourage
it from being distributed with Apache, but there are problems with this
approach.



Mime
View raw message