httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r583829 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS
Date Thu, 11 Oct 2007 19:21:03 GMT

On Oct 11, 2007, at 3:12 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:

>
>
> On 10/11/2007 04:12 PM, jim@apache.org wrote:
>> Author: jim
>> Date: Thu Oct 11 07:12:02 2007
>> New Revision: 583829
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=583829&view=rev
>> Log:
>> Add fix for, as of now, unconfirmed issue...
>>
>> Modified:
>>     httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS
>>
>> Modified: httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/ 
>> STATUS?rev=583829&r1=583828&r2=583829&view=diff
>> ===================================================================== 
>> =========
>> --- httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS (original)
>> +++ httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS Thu Oct 11 07:12:02 2007
>> @@ -207,6 +207,12 @@
>>       http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=582631
>>       +1: niq
>>
>> +    * modules/proxy/mod_proxy_http.c  
>> (ap_proxy_http_register_hook): Fix
>> +      apr_pool_cleanup_register() invocation added in r583202,  
>> which was
>> +      causing every apr_proc_create() call to segfault.
>> +      Trunk version of patch:
>> +        http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=583813
>> +
>
> I assume you are +1 on your proposal, right :-)?
>

The weird thing is that I didn't see the problem during
earlier testing (otherwise the +1 for r583202 wouldn't
have happened), so I'm doing deeper testing on recreating
the issue, but in anticipation, I added the proposal :)


Mime
View raw message