httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Ames <grega...@remulak.net>
Subject Re: New tarballs are up.
Date Mon, 20 Aug 2001 20:30:30 GMT
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Aug 19, 2001 at 11:16:12PM -0400, Greg Ames wrote:
> > Greg Ames wrote:
> > >
> > > Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I have bumped the tag on mod_include and mod_ssl, and I have re-rolled
> > > > the tarballs.  The new version of Apache 2.0.24 can be found at
> > > > http://dev.apache.org/dist
> > >
> > > daedalus says, "+1".
> >
> > daedalus changed its mind.  We took two seg faults in mod_include within
> 
> Has daedalus changed its vote to -1?  Is 2.0.24 dead now?  -- justin

An excellent question.  I don't know how frequent the seg faults would
have been had I left it running in production.  Getting two seg faults
in less than 2 hours is far less reliable than 2.0.22 has been on
daedalus.  Is it acceptable?  That's the tough question, when we have no
clue what triggers the bug.

We haven't been able to recreate the seg faults so far on daedalus on
port 8092, or on other boxes.  The plan to debug these is to add
diagnostic code to mod_include that creates a picture of the bucket
brigade within the stack (automatic string variables) at various key
points, then put 2.0.24 back into production with the instrumented
(debug) version of mod_include.  

Then, if the trigger conditions are frequent, we should get a dump soon
that will be easier to debug, and we can fix, re-tag, and re-roll.  If
the trigger conditions are infrequent and we don't get more seg faults,
then we might as well bless 2.0.24.

Opinions?

Greg

Mime
View raw message