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: Regression with range fix
Date Wed, 31 Aug 2011 12:21:33 GMT
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Orton [mailto:jorton@redhat.com] 
> Sent: Mittwoch, 31. August 2011 11:13
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Regression with range fix
> 
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 08:51:55PM +0200, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> > The first regression report, though slightly too late for the vote:
> > 
> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=639825
> > 
> > The byterange_filter.c in the Debian update is exactly the one from 
> > 2.2.20. I will keep you updated.
> 
> Hi; I'm just back from holiday and catching up.
> 
> The behaviour changes in the patch which could feasibly break 
> non-compliant clients are:
> 
> a) using 200 in some cases where a 206 response would end up being 
> larger
> 
> b) using a chunked response where previously C-L was always used, in 
> cases where >=32 ranges are being returned
> 
> Anything else to watch out for?
> 
> Looking at the patch in 2.2.x; there is a lot of effort expended 
> deadling with apr_bucket_split() returning ENOTIMPL - that looks 
> unnecessary; the filter will only handle brigades containing buckets 
> with known length, and all such buckets "must" be _split-able.

So you think we can rip out the whole if (rv == APR_ENOTIMPL) blocks?

Regards

Rüdiger


Mime
View raw message