httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bill Stoddard" <b...@wstoddard.com>
Subject Re: 2.0.28-beta release --coredumps
Date Tue, 13 Nov 2001 21:28:24 GMT
Why not use the STATUS file?

Bill
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Greg Ames" <gregames@remulak.net>
To: <dev@httpd.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 4:21 PM
Subject: Re: 2.0.28-beta release --coredumps


> Ian Holsman wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, 2001-11-13 at 12:55, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 13, 2001 at 12:49:50PM -0800, Ian Holsman wrote:
> > > > yep... I can get coredumps via this method.
> > > > but it doesn't dump core on solaris.
> > > > it serves a page weirdly, like the mod-include
> > > > is putting the buckets into the bridgade in the wrong order.
> > > >
> > > > This only happens when both the main file and the included file are
> > > > r-proxied.
> > >
> > > Something funny is happening here.  Will try to look tonight.
> > >
> > > Would you be okay if Greg included something along the lines of
> > > "ProxyPass directives may not work with included files.  We are
> > > researching this." in a Known Problems section of the 2.0.28
> > > release notes?
> > 
> > Yeah... I'm +1 on a beta.
> > 
> > can you include a line like
> > "Including a remote file from another remote file via mod-include does
> > not currently work" in the known problems.
> 
> cool.  
> 
> How about a "httpd-2.0.28-beta.known.issues" file in
> /httpd.apache.org/dist/httpd/ ?  Then anyone with write permissions can
> update it, if other stuff happens to pop up in the future.  
> 
> Greg
> 


Mime
View raw message