httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group" <ruediger.pl...@vodafone.com>
Subject RE: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.20 tarballs
Date Wed, 31 Aug 2011 08:41:38 GMT
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: William A. Rowe Jr. [mailto:wrowe@rowe-clan.net] 
> Sent: Dienstag, 30. August 2011 19:42
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] httpd-2.2.20 tarballs
> 
> On 8/30/2011 12:34 PM, Greg Ames wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 12:48 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. 
> <wrowe@rowe-clan.net
> > <mailto:wrowe@rowe-clan.net>> wrote:
> > 
> >     On 8/30/2011 10:18 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> >     > If we get enough votes by, say, 1:30pm Eastern time 
> (2hrs), I'll retag
> >     > and reroll... Otherwise, I'll go ahead w/ releasing 2.2.20.
> >     >
> >     > PS: Power and net are bouncing like jumping beans so 
> I'll check
> >     >     when I can :)
> > 
> >     It seems this could actually break resume requests for 
> .iso images,
> >     for example, so it seems prudent to reroll.
> > 
> > 
> > can you elaborate on how this could cause breakage please?  
> we have to retest if we reroll.
> 
> Nevermind, the commit is a noop, any bug still exists, we 
> should just continue
> with this package.  If the brigade must be split at 5Gb, it 
> will fail with or
> without this patch.

It will not fail, as we know that the parameter we pass to apr_bucket_split
is within the limits of apr_size_t due to earlier checks in apr_uint64_t arithmetic.
It is really just silencing a compiler warning.

Regards

Rüdiger


Mime
View raw message