httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Trawick <traw...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [PATCH] byterange patches for 2.2.19 and 2.2.20
Date Thu, 08 Sep 2011 18:45:42 GMT
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 2:17 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. <wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> On 9/8/2011 11:44 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Jeff Trawick <trawick@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Here's what I have at present:
>>> http://people.apache.org/~trawick/2.2.20-byterange-fixes.txt
>>>
>>> (compiled-in max ranges, uses same AP_ symbol as 2.2.21 even though
>>> the compiled-in version isn't the same type of "DEFAULT")
>>>
>>
>> See also http://people.apache.org/~trawick/2.2.19-byterange-fixes.txt for 2.2.19
>
> Lovely!  I think this file is far more useful, since anyone who already
> adopted .20 should be in a good position to adopt .21, while someone
> sitting back on .15 (or .9, gasp) might have a much bigger headache.
>
>> I've tested this latter patch with current framework and a separate
>> test for numranges>200 with 2.2.14, 2.2.15, and 2.2.19.  (2.2.14 needs
>> r916627, or at least the subset of it for byterange_filter.c, before
>> applying the patch.)
>
> On the 2.0 side, nothings changed since 2.0.55 that should break the patch.

BTW, do any of us have an updated 2.0 patch to reflect the important
changes since last weekend?  If not, I'll need to work on thatin the
short term.

> On the 2.2 side, we might want to publish an apply_to_2.2.14 and 2.2.19,
> just given that 2.2.9+ (which the .14 applies to) has only now reached 3
> years old.  I see no real value in working out a <2.2.8 patch /shrug

works for me

I'll get a 2.2.14-no-caveats patch together (i.e., no prepatch of
r916627 required).

Mime
View raw message