httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: h2_proxy_util.c, is this going make 2.4.21?
Date Wed, 15 Jun 2016 12:10:35 GMT
Thx!

I'll plan on T&R tomorrow w/ a release on Monday.

> On Jun 15, 2016, at 5:57 AM, Steffen <info@apachelounge.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Running now 2.4.21-dev  pulled today (wednesday), exported revision 1748510.
> 
> 
> So far all good.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Wednesday 15/06/2016 at 01:11, Gregg Smith  wrote:
>> Hi Steffen,
>> 
>> Attached is a svn pull from about 1 hour after I committed my changes. No need to
wait for tag if you would rather get a jump on testing. To maybe hit the 3 or 4 days after
when you find bugs.
>> 
>> Gregg
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 6/14/2016 2:17 AM, Steffen wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Then I wait for the Tag.
>>> 
>>> You know with me, that http2 in real live testing needs extended time  for testing.
Happened more then once  that a crash/issue was showing  up,after 3/4 days. So hope that 72
hours is enough.
>>> 
>>> Steffen
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Tuesday 14/06/2016 at 11:09, Stefan Eissing  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Steffen,
>>>> 
>>>> unfortunately not. They now contains changes that only compile with a  2.4.21
httpd.
>>>> 
>>>> -Stefan
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Am 14.06.2016 um 11:06 schrieb Steffen <info@apachelounge.com>:
>>>>> 
>>>>> I rather like to test before tagging.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Can you apply these changes for my testing also to  Git ?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Steffen
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Tuesday 14/06/2016 at 10:54, Stefan Eissing wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I just backported the h2_proxy_util.c change in r1748359. It also
 uses the back ported ap_cstr_casecmp* instead of its own copies. I  tried to update the win
build files appropriately, but am unable to  check the correctness.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Gregg: please commit your changes when awake enough. Hopefully Jim
 can keep his fingers from the tag button long enough...
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>               Stefan
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Am 13.06.2016 um 22:40 schrieb William A Rowe Jr  <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Gregg Smith <gls@gknw.net>
wrote:
>>>>>>> I have the to connect this module in the traditional windows
build  but as of right now it's using h2_util.c which Bill had an  objection to. See his comments
http://marc.info/?l=apache-httpd-dev&m=146543811201820&w=2
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> So to me that seems to be a -1 to mod_proxy_http2, at minimum
on  Windows. In trunk Stefan seems to have chosen option 3 in Bill's  list and that is h2_proxy_util.c.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> If I knew that was going to be backported I would add the rest
of  the bits needed to use h2_proxy_util.c. If it is not going to make  it, then I will not
commit anything and there will be no  mod_proxy_http2 in 2.4.21 on Windows. If this gets in
overnight  and you tag in the morning, I may not be out of bed yet due to the  time difference.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> That's where my concern is. Make sense?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Shouldn't be a concern. I'm mildly concerned about the  single-level
namespace
>>>>>>> collisions on Unix, but because the .so object is pre-linked
to  its own functions
>>>>>>> before anything is imported/exported, mod_http2.so should be
using  h2_utils.o
>>>>>>> and mod_proxy_http2.so should be using h2_proxy_utils.o, even
 without any
>>>>>>> additional namespace protection. A third module trying to use
the  functions of
>>>>>>> those two modules could cause headaches, but that can be addressed
 later.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Windows has two-level namespaces, so there is no ambiguity between
 symbols
>>>>>>> in one .so (.dll) and a second, unless you are simultaneously
 linking a module
>>>>>>> to both of these modules.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I accept Stefan's proposed fix for the time being, and we can
 certainly make
>>>>>>> this simpler on trunk in the future.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Bill
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 


Mime
View raw message