httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From c...@decus.org (Rodent of Unusual Size)
Subject Re: [STATUS] Sat Apr 19 21:05:18 PDT 1997
Date Sun, 20 Apr 1997 13:34:18 GMT
>From the fingers of Dean Gaudet flowed the following:
>
>Agenda for 1.2b9-dev
>====================
>
>Patches available:
>    
>  * Ken's [PATCH] plug for mod_example memory leak
>    <97041810055549@decus.org>
>    [Isn't this effectively documentation and not subject to the voting
>    rules? -dean]

    Already committed using the same logic.  I have an idea about a
    further improvement, but the leak-per-request is plugged.  Not worth
    holding 1.2 on under any circumstances.

>  * 404 errors for server-parsed files not logged in error log
>    Status: Paul +1, Dean +1
>
>  * Paul's Logging bad methods and URIs
>    Status: Paul +1, Dean +1
>
>  * Dean's [PATCH] PR#375: MaxClients needs to be at least 1
>    Status: Dean +1
>
>  * Dean's [PATCH] PR#344: 64-bit cleanups (take 2)
>    Status: Dean +1 but hey, no hard feelings if this slips 1.2

    I don't think any of these are worth delaying 1.2final.  Let's get
    it out the hatch; these are not showstoppers IMHO.  (I'm suddenly
    struck by a comparison of bug-chasing and fractal iteration..)

>Should be done for 1.2:
>
>  * Listen and serialization problem should at least be documented,
>    perhaps solved.

    At this point I think any improvement that *can* be made to the docs
    *should* be.  They're going to be out there for a long time..  How
    about putting a script into support that goes to Apache.Org, picks
    up a docs tarball, and unpacks it on the local system?  Providing
    (or documenting) some mechanism that allows the 1.2 release docs on
    a system to be updated from the master would be a goodness,
    methinks.

>  * suexec has lots of open PRs:
>    PR#269, 319, 395: suexec and SSI problems
>    PR#367, 368, 354: SEGV caused by suexec
>    PR#341: documentation error?  user confusion?
>    PR#339: suexec doesn't work with QUERY_STRINGs
>
>    Maybe we should say suexec is experimental...

    If we have to, we have to.  This isn't a core part of the server,
    but I'd really like to see it working and stable before 1.2final -
    it's needed, we're taking heat about it, and we'll continue to do so
    even if we *do* say it's X.

>  * PR#373: timeout problems introduced between 1.2b7 and 1.2b8

    Now *this*, if reproducible, ought to get fixed before 1.2final
    (IMHO).  BTW, folks, when you reply to apbugs (and thus into GNATS),
    please consider seriously limiting the quoting you do of the
    original message?  Some of the PRs are suffering serious
    quote-bloat..

>  * Various minor tweaks to port to different platforms:
>    PR#383, PR#388, PR#399, PR#333, PR#327

    Save for 1.2.1.

>Documentation Changes that should make 1.2:
>
>  * Document allow/deny from env=
>  * Document defaults for order allow,deny, and order deny,allow
>  * SVR4 can probably use HAVE_SHMGET ... document it so that people can
>    make the choice themselves.

    Yes, let's get these into 1.2.

>  * some better suexec docs would be really nice, detailing some of the
>    security risks and compromises discussed
>	Status: I think Randy said something about doing it at one point.
>	New Status: not really worth holding 1.2 on

    I disagree.  I think this is either going to be viewed as an
    integral part of the package, in which case we need to document it
    correctly, or else it should move into contrib.  I prefer the
    former.

>  * Document problems with mismatch on FD_SETSIZE=1024?
>  * Deal with Martin Kraemer's documentation notes:
>  * Document Linux uio.h iovec compilation crap errors.

    Yes.

>  * Marc proposed keeping a list of things broken for HTTP/1.1; on the
>      Web or part of the distribution?
>      (no PR#, 1.2, 21/2/1997, "Marc Slemko" <marcs@znep.com>)
>        - Chuck likes the idea (hopefully will reduce redundant
>    	  reports); thinks it should be on the Web
>        - Ken thinks it should be in the htdocs tree so it hits both
>	- Chuck gives +1 to Ken's idea, so does Ralf

    Once again, do we *have* anything (except the proxy) which falls
    into this category?  If not, let's take it off the list..
    Otherwise, let's write it up quickly and get it into the doc tree
    for 1.2.

    #ken    :-)}

Mime
View raw message