William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > > Please fetch up the newly prepared mod_ftp-0.9.6.tar.gz (or .bz2), or the > win32/netware/os2 suitable package mod_ftp-0.9.6-crlf.zip from; > > [ ] +1 to release as 0.9.6-beta > [ ] +1 to release as 0.9.6 GA +1 for GA; wrowe +.5 for GA; trawick, rjung binding +1 for beta; wrowe, trawick, rpluem, fuankg, rjung Additional positive feedback from Jorge and Mario (linux, win32) It would be good in the next cycle, with all of the small improvements that Jeff and I had worked on, to bless this as GA. Unfortunately .5 votes don't sum to 1 :) Thanks everyone for reviewing! --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
Michael Felt wrote: > ok. I'll register on the devs list. > > Can you tell me the proper steps for "integrating" a newer version of > libtool into the process? Or shall I wait for the dev list? You were on the right path. You should probably bring this up as a seperate dev@ thread, since everyone on unix, not just aix, is going to trip up if there are bugs integrating the newest libtool :( --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
On 06.10.2009 18:47, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > Rainer Jung wrote: >> >> Note concerning the Windows build files: I did a "neu erstellen", should >> be something like clean&build. As a result for mod_ftp I did not get >> .pdb files. They were only produced for mod_ftp_example. >> >> Digging into it a little deeper reveals, that if you do "neu erstellen", >> then it first produces all files for mod_ftp (including pdb), then >> removes most of them as part of the clean for mod_ftp_example and then >> produces the files for mod_ftp_example. > > As I inquired before, do you encounter this problem cleaning, building and > installing using Makefile-ftp.win? Choosing ALL=1 to the makefile should > trigger this. The problem is again, command line vars are not passing from > the first nmake invocation into its sub-nmake's, something I need to investigate. No, I used the .dsw and Visual Studio. See my separate post about mod_fcgid where I reported problems and fix for the Makefile-*.win a few minutes ago. I found the ALL switch during that test in the fcgid makefile (sic). For me it looks like parsing the vars does work, it was only broken fr INSTDIR, because it was accidentially and unconditionaly overwritten at the beginning of the Makefile. See patch link in my other post. Regards, Rainer --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
ok. I'll register on the devs list. Can you tell me the proper steps for "integrating" a newer version of libtool into the process? Or shall I wait for the dev list? On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 7:12 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>wrote: > Michael Felt wrote: > > I am just afraid that there will be so much to read in the "devs". > > The experts you need to ask all participate on the dev list (part of the > reason > to close this list). Please, do ask there, and if you attach your > config.log > result to the incident (as distributed, then as re-./buildconf'ed with a > newer > libtool) that would be helpful. I don't expect you'll get satisfaction on > this > list, nor even the users@ list since I doubt there are many familiar with > AIX > who participate there. But perhaps it doesn't hurt to ask on users@first. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org > >
Michael Felt wrote: > I am just afraid that there will be so much to read in the "devs". The experts you need to ask all participate on the dev list (part of the reason to close this list). Please, do ask there, and if you attach your config.log result to the incident (as distributed, then as re-./buildconf'ed with a newer libtool) that would be helpful. I don't expect you'll get satisfaction on this list, nor even the users@ list since I doubt there are many familiar with AIX who participate there. But perhaps it doesn't hurt to ask on users@ first. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
I am just afraid that there will be so much to read in the "devs". re: A diff of the build steps, to determine if it's the commands fed to libtool, or the behavior of libtool itself, would be really helpful with the issue you raised :) The build steps are the same: I unpack the archive and run a configure script. ./configure --prefix=/usr/local/apache2 \ --enable-module=so \ --enable-module=unique_id \ --enable-module=usertrack \ --enable-module=vhost_alias \ --enable-rewrite=shared \ --enable-speling=shared \ --enable-digest=shared \ --enable-cgi=shared \ --enable-headers=shared \ --enable-info=shared \ --enable-log_forensic=shared \ --enable-proxy=shared \ --enable-proxy-connect=shared \ --enable-proxy-ftp=shared \ --enable-proxy-http=shared \ --enable-proxy-ajp=shared \ --enable-proxy-balancer=shared \ --with-z=/data/prj/zlib-1.2.3 As compiler I am using xlC version 7, patched to July 2009 (last patch I expect). What I consider strange/wrong is that I know AIX can support shared libraries, but config (again I assume it is libtool) says it cannot. I compiled libtool 2.2.6a, compiled python 2.6.3 and ran buildconf and now the build fails completely. Without the buildconf the new libtool is just ignored. For a next notice - attachments are "normal", or would you rather have a URL to download from? I'll redo the 2.2.14 configures and builds - nohup.configure and nohup.make as results. And then we can go from there. On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 8:24 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>wrote: > Michael Felt wrote: > > I see that you are thinking of stopping this list due to overlap with the > > dev list. Don't let me be the one to stop you. > > > > My major interest for "contributing" is to test for building on AIX 5.3 > and > > AIX 6.1 - not development. I would not feel comfortable, at least > initially, > > in dev where I expect the discussions will be on other things. > > > > Currently I am trying to understand a problem with libtool. At least that > is > > what I suspect to be the problem - as the 2.2.14 build creates the .so > > modules fine on AIX 5.3 but not on AIX 6.1. > > > > If questions/problems like this are not suitable for "test" discussions, > > then I'll see if I can find what is needed in users and be much more > passive > > in my contributations. > > > > If there a different forum (from testers or users) I could better place > my > > questions/content please inform me - and accept my apologies for > disturbing > > your peace and quiet. > > Actually that's an entirely appropriate topic for dev@. Which pretty much > goes > to the point of shuttering the list, there are very few "it broke" posts > that don't > lead to a dev@ discussion, and honestly the dev's enjoy hearing "it > works!" at least > once in a while :) > > A diff of the build steps, to determine if it's the commands fed to > libtool, or the > behavior of libtool itself, would be really helpful with the issue you > raised :) > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org > >
Rainer Jung wrote: > > Note concerning the Windows build files: I did a "neu erstellen", should > be something like clean&build. As a result for mod_ftp I did not get > .pdb files. They were only produced for mod_ftp_example. > > Digging into it a little deeper reveals, that if you do "neu erstellen", > then it first produces all files for mod_ftp (including pdb), then > removes most of them as part of the clean for mod_ftp_example and then > produces the files for mod_ftp_example. As I inquired before, do you encounter this problem cleaning, building and installing using Makefile-ftp.win? Choosing ALL=1 to the makefile should trigger this. The problem is again, command line vars are not passing from the first nmake invocation into its sub-nmake's, something I need to investigate. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
On 29.09.2009 05:28, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > [ ] -1 for any release of 0.9.6 (regressed from 0.9.2 or earlier?) > [ ] +1 to release as 0.9.6-beta > [ ] +1 to release as 0.9.6 GA Exactly like Jeff: +1 for beta + 0.5 for GA (I don't know enough about it to be more sure) This time I tested on Windows (XP with VS .NET 2003 against httpd 2.2.14 out of tree). Note concerning the Windows build files: I did a "neu erstellen", should be something like clean&build. As a result for mod_ftp I did not get .pdb files. They were only produced for mod_ftp_example. Digging into it a little deeper reveals, that if you do "neu erstellen", then it first produces all files for mod_ftp (including pdb), then removes most of them as part of the clean for mod_ftp_example and then produces the files for mod_ftp_example. Regards, Rainer --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > Following Rainer's Solaris discoveries and our DISTDIR suggestions, > > Please fetch up the newly prepared mod_ftp-0.9.6.tar.gz (or .bz2), or the > win32/netware/os2 suitable package mod_ftp-0.9.6-crlf.zip from; 7 days have passed, and although my first inclination is to declare the vote closed with 2 +1's and begin the dissolution of this effort, I'll leave the vote open three more days before ending evaluation of this package and taking it to its logical conclusion. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
Michael Felt wrote: > I see that you are thinking of stopping this list due to overlap with the > dev list. Don't let me be the one to stop you. > > My major interest for "contributing" is to test for building on AIX 5.3 and > AIX 6.1 - not development. I would not feel comfortable, at least initially, > in dev where I expect the discussions will be on other things. > > Currently I am trying to understand a problem with libtool. At least that is > what I suspect to be the problem - as the 2.2.14 build creates the .so > modules fine on AIX 5.3 but not on AIX 6.1. > > If questions/problems like this are not suitable for "test" discussions, > then I'll see if I can find what is needed in users and be much more passive > in my contributations. > > If there a different forum (from testers or users) I could better place my > questions/content please inform me - and accept my apologies for disturbing > your peace and quiet. Actually that's an entirely appropriate topic for dev@. Which pretty much goes to the point of shuttering the list, there are very few "it broke" posts that don't lead to a dev@ discussion, and honestly the dev's enjoy hearing "it works!" at least once in a while :) A diff of the build steps, to determine if it's the commands fed to libtool, or the behavior of libtool itself, would be really helpful with the issue you raised :) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
I see that you are thinking of stopping this list due to overlap with the dev list. Don't let me be the one to stop you. My major interest for "contributing" is to test for building on AIX 5.3 and AIX 6.1 - not development. I would not feel comfortable, at least initially, in dev where I expect the discussions will be on other things. Currently I am trying to understand a problem with libtool. At least that is what I suspect to be the problem - as the 2.2.14 build creates the .so modules fine on AIX 5.3 but not on AIX 6.1. If questions/problems like this are not suitable for "test" discussions, then I'll see if I can find what is needed in users and be much more passive in my contributations. If there a different forum (from testers or users) I could better place my questions/content please inform me - and accept my apologies for disturbing your peace and quiet. Michael http://www.rootvg.net
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > [X] +1 to release as 0.9.6-beta > [x] +1 to release as 0.9.6 GA Certainly ready for release as a beta, and looks as close to GA as needed to me. [Note this would be 0.9.6 GA, no promises of binary ABI compatibility from release to release until we decided to bump it to 1.0.0.] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > > [X] -1 for any release of 2.3.2 (regressed from 2.3.1?) > [ ] +1 to release as 2.3.2-beta > [ ] +1 to release as 2.3.2-GA C:\local0\asf\release\module-build\mod_fcgid\modules\fcgid\fcgid_pm_win.c(142) : error C2065: 'LOG_WARNING' : undeclared identifier fcgid_proc_win.c C:\local0\asf\release\module-build\mod_fcgid\modules\fcgid\fcgid_proc_win.c(164) : error C2143: syntax error : missing ';' before 'if' fcgid_proctbl_win.c fcgid_protocol.c fcgid_spawn_ctl.c mod_fcgid.c C:\local0\asf\release\module-build\mod_fcgid\modules\fcgid\mod_fcgid.c(35) : war ning C4273: 'fcgid_module' : inconsistent dll linkage. dllexport assumed. But in the spirit of release early, release often, we'll try again. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
On Sep 28, 2009, at 11:30 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > Quick on the heels of mod_fcgid 2.3.1 we have another candidate for > your > consideration, with many improvements to docs and especially the > authn/authz > interface. > > Please fetch up the newly minted mod_fcgid-2.3.2.tar.gz (or bz2) > or the win32 suitable package mod_fcgid-2.3.2-crlf.zip from: > > http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/mod_fcgid/ > > review, take it for a spin, and cast your choice > > [ ] -1 for any release of 2.3.2 (regressed from 2.3.1?) > [ ] +1 to release as 2.3.2-beta > [ ] +1 to release as 2.3.2-GA > > Note no configuration updates occur yet on make install. Not sure > what our > 'example' aught to look like, yet. Documentation still needs > substantial > attention from fans to fill in the text. > > For getting started, > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/mod_fcgid/tags/2.3.2/README- > FCGID > +1 release as 2.3.2-beta --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
I haven't seen any feedback of testers to this list in the past year that doesn't occur also on the dev@ list. If you find this list of value, please respond on-list in the next week or so. Otherwise, we'll go ahead and close the testers list, moving all testing announce and discussion traffic to the dev@ list. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
Quick on the heels of mod_fcgid 2.3.1 we have another candidate for your consideration, with many improvements to docs and especially the authn/authz interface. Please fetch up the newly minted mod_fcgid-2.3.2.tar.gz (or bz2) or the win32 suitable package mod_fcgid-2.3.2-crlf.zip from: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/mod_fcgid/ review, take it for a spin, and cast your choice [ ] -1 for any release of 2.3.2 (regressed from 2.3.1?) [ ] +1 to release as 2.3.2-beta [ ] +1 to release as 2.3.2-GA Note no configuration updates occur yet on make install. Not sure what our 'example' aught to look like, yet. Documentation still needs substantial attention from fans to fill in the text. For getting started, http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/mod_fcgid/tags/2.3.2/README-FCGID Bill --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
Following Rainer's Solaris discoveries and our DISTDIR suggestions, Please fetch up the newly prepared mod_ftp-0.9.6.tar.gz (or .bz2), or the win32/netware/os2 suitable package mod_ftp-0.9.6-crlf.zip from; http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/mod_ftp/ review, take it for a spin, and cast your choice [ ] -1 for any release of 0.9.6 (regressed from 0.9.2 or earlier?) [ ] +1 to release as 0.9.6-beta [ ] +1 to release as 0.9.6 GA For getting started, http://httpd.apache.org/mod_ftp/ and http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/mod_ftp/tags/0.9.6/README-FTP Bill --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
On 09.09.2009 01:48, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > [ ] -1 for any release of 0.9.5 (regressed from 0.9.4 or earlier?) > [X] +1 to release as 0.9.5-beta > [ ] +1 to release as 0.9.5-beta, and ready to tag GA (1.0.0) Beta because of build problems on some platforms. On Solaris the build using gcc 4.1 doesn't go through. This is now fixed in trunk. I did only do some small testing using an httpd 2.2 and anonymous ftp access. So far it looked good. Regards, Rainer --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > [ ] +1 to release as 2.3.1-beta With +1's recorded from chrisd, trawick and wrowe, the package is released as-beta (due principally to the more experimental auth issues and terse documentation). I've staged the release, and in response to the details from Rainer, I regenerated the .md5/.sha1 tags in the process, using appropriate tools. The embedded filenames now reflect -beta tags. At 2pm EDT we can go ahead and sync the entire site, but I won't be at the office for an hour or so after that, so if anyone beats me to it, terrific :) I've synced the module doc area for mod_fcgid and the configuration is also updated to bridge all our links across into the httpd trunk docs. Feel free to test this out before the entire site is synced; http://httpd.apache.org/mod_fcgid/ you may be waiting for up to 45 minutes after this message for minotaur to sync to the live server. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > [X] +1 to release as 2.3.1-beta Beta, not GA yet IMHO. I'll work out the schema of httpd.a.o/mod_fcgid/ following mod_ftp's pattern and call this vote completed, with all positive responses; +1's from trawick and wrowe, plus a nod from from Rainer, Gregg, and Mario... if we see the third binding PMC vote by Tuesday afternoon [7th day of voting]. Bill --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > [X] +1 to release as 0.9.5-beta But with a single vote, I'll declare this vote DOA on Tuesday night, after seven days of voting. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
Rainer Jung wrote: > > Signing good, hash files are in a format at least my md5sum and sha1sum > do not understand how to check. Can anyone point out what I'm doing wrong with 'gpg --print-md md5'? Am I missing some magic flag, or is the idea of using gpg to create hashes simply broken? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
On 09.09.2009 01:48, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> mod_fcgid freinds;
>
> Please fetch up the newly minted mod_fcgid-2.3.1.tar.gz (or bz2)
> or the win32 suitable package mod_fcgid-2.3.1-crlf.zip from:
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/mod_fcgid/
>
> review, take it for a spin, and cast your choice
>
> [ ] -1 for any release of 2.3.1 (regressed from 2.3.0?)
> [X] +1 to release as 2.3.1-beta
> [ ] +1 to release as 2.3.1-GA
> Note no configuration updates occur yet on make install. Not sure what our
> 'example' aught to look like, yet. Note no documentation was donated, so
> there is a reference to all of the directives taken from the cmd_rec array,
> but this needs attention from fans to fill in the text and correct a few
> more typos.
Tested against httpd 2.2.x on Solaris 8.
Signing good, hash files are in a format at least my md5sum and sha1sum
do not understand how to check.
configure runs fine.
Some minor warnings during make (all Solaris-specific):
fcgid_proctbl_unix.c:261: warning: format '%d' expects type 'int', but
argument 7 has type 'pid_t'
fcgid_proctbl_unix.c:268: warning: format '%d' expects type 'int', but
argument 7 has type 'pid_t'
fcgid_proctbl_unix.c:280: warning: format '%d' expects type 'int', but
argument 7 has type 'pid_t'
fcgid_pm_unix.c:239: warning: format '%d' expects type 'int', but
argument 7 has type 'pid_t'
fcgid_pm_unix.c:268: warning: format '%d' expects type 'int', but
argument 7 has type 'pid_t'
fcgid_proc_unix.c:229: warning: format '%d' expects type 'int', but
argument 5 has type 'pid_t'
fcgid_proc_unix.c:865: warning: format '%d' expects type 'int', but
argument 8 has type 'pid_t'
Tested with a simple echo server using ab and a few thousand requests.
Looks reliable.
I think it's still beta, because the docs are not enough to get one
started. Especially the description for FCGIWrapper is strange:
- I wasn't able to use it without the optional (?) second param:
In file fcgid_conf.c:
762 const char *set_wrapper_config(cmd_parms * cmd, void *dirconfig,
763 const char *wrapperpath,
764 const char *extension)
765 {
...
775 /* Sanity check */
776 if (wrapperpath == NULL || extension == NULL
-----------------------------------^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
777 || *extension != '.' || *(extension + 1) == '\0'
778 ...
779 return "Invalid wrapper file extension";
although it is declared as
AP_INIT_TAKE12("FCGIWrapper", set_wrapper_config, NULL,
RSRC_CONF | ACCESS_CONF | OR_FILEINFO,
"The CGI wrapper setting"),
- the needed "extension" is completely undocumented
- the path of wrapperpath is not resolved relative to the server root
Regards,
Rainer
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
mod_fcgid freinds; Please fetch up the newly minted mod_fcgid-2.3.1.tar.gz (or bz2) or the win32 suitable package mod_fcgid-2.3.1-crlf.zip from: http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/mod_fcgid/ review, take it for a spin, and cast your choice [ ] -1 for any release of 2.3.1 (regressed from 2.3.0?) [ ] +1 to release as 2.3.1-beta [ ] +1 to release as 2.3.1-GA The most major change was handling modern win32 apr calls, and filling in the basic pathing variables by platform to help launch the cgid process in the first place. Note no configuration updates occur yet on make install. Not sure what our 'example' aught to look like, yet. Note no documentation was donated, so there is a reference to all of the directives taken from the cmd_rec array, but this needs attention from fans to fill in the text and correct a few more typos. For getting started, http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/mod_fcgid/tags/2.3.1/README-FCGID Bill --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
Let's see if this is it...
Please fetch up the newly prepared mod_ftp-0.9.5.tar.gz (or .bz2), or the
win32/netware/os2 suitable package mod_ftp-0.9.5-crlf.zip from;
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/mod_ftp/
review, take it for a spin, and cast your choice
[ ] -1 for any release of 0.9.5 (regressed from 0.9.4 or earlier?)
[ ] +1 to release as 0.9.5-beta
[ ] +1 to release as 0.9.5-beta, and ready to tag GA (1.0.0)
Please let us know if you test the two significant issues;
CURRENT RELEASE NOTES:
* EPSV and EPRT need real world testing for different routing and DMZ
cases and validating a range of IPv6-enabled clients' interop.
Note many IPv4-only NAT routers appear to ignore EPRT commands,
even as they would fix up NAT addresses from PORT commands.
* Extra attention should be paid to PORT and EPRT connections, especially
when assigned low numbered ports, e.g. FTPActiveRange 20
These are my only hesitations in blessing the release 1.0.0 just yet.
Please be brutal in respect to testing both aspects :)
For getting started,
http://httpd.apache.org/mod_ftp/
and
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/mod_ftp/tags/0.9.5/README-FTP
Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > Hello folks; > > I'm taking a quick semi-official survey as the list moderator. As you > know, invitations to test are posted at both dev@httpd and testers@httpd. > Frequently, this means that non-subscriber replies are lost to one list > or the other, at least for a period of time. In the case of testers@, > I suspect this list does not support moderation of non-subscriber posts. > > Please respond if this forum fills a need that neither dev@httpd nor > announce@httpd satisfies for -you-, since I'm principally concerned with > the current list users. What makes this list valuable to you? > > I'm proposing to shutter the list if there is insufficient interest to > maintain testing efforts on both the dev@ and testers@. Since three days have elapsed with zero response, I'll wait another and then ask the dev@ team for approval to terminate this mailing list. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
Hello folks; I'm taking a quick semi-official survey as the list moderator. As you know, invitations to test are posted at both dev@httpd and testers@httpd. Frequently, this means that non-subscriber replies are lost to one list or the other, at least for a period of time. In the case of testers@, I suspect this list does not support moderation of non-subscriber posts. Please respond if this forum fills a need that neither dev@httpd nor announce@httpd satisfies for -you-, since I'm principally concerned with the current list users. What makes this list valuable to you? I'm proposing to shutter the list if there is insufficient interest to maintain testing efforts on both the dev@ and testers@. Yours, Bill --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
Guenter Knauf wrote: > Bill, > William A. Rowe, Jr. schrieb: >> With this fixed; and hopefully a resolution to the issue I had raised >> with Guenter r.e. file overwriting > reverted. Thanks; something aught to be said under a Netware heading of README-FTP, if you can whip up a paragraph or two? >> "this looks like 1.0.0" release. > the 2.2.x authn_anon module seems to lack of the > 'Anonymous_Authoritative' directive which makes the sample config break. > I would suggest that we comment this out. +1, feel free to patch. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > > [X] -1 for any release of 0.9.3 (regressed from 0.9.2?) It's not a regression, but I'm trying to correct the fact that normal disconnects, al la >>> QUIT <<< 221 Goodbye. result in half closed sockets. The data connections both passive and active are correctly closed, and lie in TIME_WAIT for a bit, but these control connections are sitting at; tcp 1 0 ::1:21 ::1:46180 CLOSE_WAIT tcp 0 0 ::1:46180 ::1:21 FIN_WAIT2 not looking good. But reviewing the code, I don't see the flaw, so I'll end up spending tracing time on this to work out why we hadn't correctly invoked apr_lingering_close. Bother. With this fixed; and hopefully a resolution to the issue I had raised with Guenter r.e. file overwriting, and the issue I raised about the oddness with FNM_PERIOD matching, I really think we are ready for the "this looks like 1.0.0" release. Bill --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
mod_ftp fans;
We seem to have identified and solved our remaining 0.9.2 beta issues,
so it's time for another, perhaps the final try on the way to GA!
Please fetch up the newly prepared mod_ftp-0.9.3.tar.gz (available
now), or the win32/netware/os2 suitable package mod_ftp-0.9.3-crlf.zip
(still needs to sync in the next hour) from:
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/mod_ftp/
review, take it for a spin, and cast your choice
[ ] -1 for any release of 0.9.3 (regressed from 0.9.2?)
[ ] +1 to release as 0.9.3-beta
[ ] +1 to release as 0.9.3-beta, and ready to tag GA (1.0.0)
Please let us know if you test the two significant issues;
CURRENT RELEASE NOTES:
* EPSV and EPRT need real world testing for different routing and DMZ
cases and validating a range of IPv6-enabled clients' interop.
Note many IPv4-only NAT routers appear to ignore EPRT commands,
even as they would fix up NAT addresses from PORT commands.
* Extra attention should be paid to PORT and EPRT connections, especially
when assigned low numbered ports, e.g. FTPActiveRange 20
These are my only hesitations in blessing the release 1.0.0 just yet.
Please be brutal in respect to testing both aspects :)
For getting started,
http://httpd.apache.org/mod_ftp/
and
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/mod_ftp/tags/0.9.3/README-FTP
Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
Paul Querna wrote: > Gregg L. Smith wrote: >> Paul Querna wrote: >>> Test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.3.0-alpha are available at: >>> >>> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ >>> >>> Your votes please; >>> >>> ±1 >>> [ ] Release httpd-2.3.0 as Alpha >>> >>> >>> Vote closes at 7:00 UTC on Tuesday December 9 2008. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Paul >> -? tested on Windows XP built both VS9 and VS6 >> >> Am I missing something? >> >> [Mon Dec 08 13:21:17 2008] [crit] Server MUST relinquish startup >> privileges before accepting connections. Please ensure mod_unixd or >> other system security module is loaded. >> Configuration Failed > > I'm guessing no one updated the winnt mpm for the changes to unixd. > > So the proposed release is busted on windows too :-) Given the state of things - I'm not -1 on a unix-specific alpha release for this issue, but am leaning -.5 for the deflate/filtering/subrequest problems that were recently uncovered. I'll research this issue so when we are ready to try 2.3.1-alpha, it's been resolved. Might not be in the next 2 days though, think it will likely have to wait for my weekend. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
Ruediger Pluem wrote: > Test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.2.11 are available at: > > http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ > > Your votes please; > > +/-1 > [ ] Release httpd-2.2.11 as GA +1 here, a flawless build. -win32-src, .msi's and -symbols are all in /dev/dist waiting to catch up with the sync, of course. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
On Dec 6, 2008, at 11:30 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
> Test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.2.11 are available at:
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
>
> Your votes please;
>
> +/-1
> [ ] Release httpd-2.2.11 as GA
>
+1 on Solaris 10/sparc
SunOS sunsys 5.10 Generic_127127-11 sun4u sparc SUNW,Sun-Blade-100
Test Summary Report
-------------------
t/modules/digest (Wstat: 0 Tests: 13 Failed: 5)
Failed tests: 6-8, 11-12
Files=69, Tests=2429, 335 wallclock secs (23.28 usr 3.98 sys +
214.74 cusr 40.26 csys = 282.26 CPU)
Result: FAIL
Failed 1/69 test programs. 5/2429 subtests failed.
+1 on Ubuntu 8.10
Linux jim-ubuntu 2.6.27-7-generic #1 SMP Tue Nov 4 19:33:20 UTC
2008 i686 GNU/Linux
Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail List of Failed
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
t/modules/digest.t 13 5 6-8 11-12
14 tests and 14 subtests skipped.
Failed 1/69 test scripts. 5/2217 subtests failed.
Files=69, Tests=2217, 65 wallclock secs (17.48 cusr + 12.49 csys =
29.97 CPU)
Failed 1/69 test programs. 5/2217 subtests failed.
+1 on OSX 10.5.5
Darwin xxx.xxx.xxx 9.5.0 Darwin Kernel Version 9.5.0: Wed Sep 3
11:29:43 PDT 2008; root:xnu-1228.7.58~1/RELEASE_I386 i386
All tests successful, 9 tests and 18 subtests skipped.
Files=81, Tests=2831, 89 wallclock secs (33.19 cusr + 5.79 csys =
38.98 CPU)
no regressions on any platform....
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
Paul Querna wrote: > Gregg L. Smith wrote: >> >> [Mon Dec 08 13:21:17 2008] [crit] Server MUST relinquish startup >> privileges before accepting connections. Please ensure mod_unixd or >> other system security module is loaded. >> Configuration Failed > > I'm guessing no one updated the winnt mpm for the changes to unixd. > > So the proposed release is busted on windows too :-) Well, windows can't relinquish the context it is run-as (trivially) without such things as user account passwords and so forth. So, one could say the unixd API is busted ;-) But I wouldn't mind at all if windows emitted a notice that "This server is running as a privilaged LocalSystem user, preventing access to any network file systems (UNC Shares) - you are strongly encouraged to reconfigure the <xxx> service to run-as a more restricted user" and if running in another privileged context; "This server is running as the a privilaged <xxx> user, you are strongly encouraged to reconfigure the <xxx> service to run-as a more restricted user" What happens on unix if started as the same user? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
Gregg L. Smith wrote: > Paul Querna wrote: >> Test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.3.0-alpha are available at: >> >> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ >> >> Your votes please; >> >> ±1 >> [ ] Release httpd-2.3.0 as Alpha >> >> >> Vote closes at 7:00 UTC on Tuesday December 9 2008. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Paul > -? tested on Windows XP built both VS9 and VS6 > > Am I missing something? > > [Mon Dec 08 13:21:17 2008] [crit] Server MUST relinquish startup > privileges before accepting connections. Please ensure mod_unixd or > other system security module is loaded. > Configuration Failed I'm guessing no one updated the winnt mpm for the changes to unixd. So the proposed release is busted on windows too :-) -Paul --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
Paul Querna wrote: > Test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.3.0-alpha are available at: > > http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ > > Your votes please; > > ±1 > [ ] Release httpd-2.3.0 as Alpha > > > Vote closes at 7:00 UTC on Tuesday December 9 2008. -1 for these two reasons: 1) Default build doesn't work with mod_proxy due to module load order issues. I believe even for an alpha, we should at least compile and start with the default configuration. 2) The sub-requests issues seen on velocity.apache.org, while I'm not so sure about this one being a blocker, it does prevent our own infrastructure from fully using 2.3.x without workarounds. Thanks, Paul --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote: >> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >> Von: Paul Querna >> Gesendet: Sonntag, 7. Dezember 2008 08:18 >> An: dev@httpd.apache.org; testers@httpd.apache.org >> Betreff: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha >> >> Test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.3.0-alpha are available at: >> >> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ >> >> Your votes please; >> >> ±1 >> [ ] Release httpd-2.3.0 as Alpha >> >> >> Vote closes at 7:00 UTC on Tuesday December 9 2008. > > Where do we track issues that do not prevent an alpha release > but need to be resolved before 2.4.0? > > In the STATUS file of trunk? Yes, STATUS file on trunk should be the right place. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
>>> On 12/6/2008 at 9:30 AM, in message <493AA88D.6030908@apache.org>, Ruediger Pluem <rpluem@apache.org> wrote: > Test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.2.11 are available at: > > http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ > > Your votes please; > > +/-1 > [ ] Release httpd-2.2.11 as GA > > Regards > > Rüdiger +1 NetWare Brad --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
On Dec 8, 2008, at 8:34 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > On Dec 8, 2008, at 8:15 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote: > >> >> >>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >>> Von: Paul Querna >>> Gesendet: Sonntag, 7. Dezember 2008 08:18 >>> An: dev@httpd.apache.org; testers@httpd.apache.org >>> Betreff: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha >>> >>> Test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.3.0-alpha are available at: >>> >>> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ >>> >>> Your votes please; >>> >>> ±1 >>> [ ] Release httpd-2.3.0 as Alpha >>> >>> >> >> I noticed one problem. Since we placed the proxy balancer modules >> in a >> separate folder they get loaded *before* mod_proxy in the created >> httpd.conf. This causes httpd to fail at start as the balancer >> modules >> need symbols from proxy_util (which is linked into mod_proxy). >> >> So I guess we either need to adjust the process that creates the >> LoadModule >> directives for our generated httpd.conf so that the balancer >> modules get loaded >> later or we need to make said symbols optional functions. >> > > Hmmmm.... Actually, we could do this at build time, since make > goes into the subdirs first and makes proxy/balancers and then proxy/, > so I need to figure out how to convince the build system to do > proxy first and then proxy/balancer... Any ideas from any > build system gurus? > Early, cold and no coffee... and Monday! Not a good start for using one's neurons. Fixed... --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org
On Dec 8, 2008, at 8:37 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > On Dec 8, 2008, at 8:15 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote: > >> >> >>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >>> Von: Paul Querna >>> Gesendet: Sonntag, 7. Dezember 2008 08:18 >>> An: dev@httpd.apache.org; testers@httpd.apache.org >>> Betreff: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.3.0-alpha >>> >>> Test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.3.0-alpha are available at: >>> >>> http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ >>> >>> Your votes please; >>> >>> ±1 >>> [ ] Release httpd-2.3.0 as Alpha >>> >>> >> >> I noticed one problem. Since we placed the proxy balancer modules >> in a >> separate folder they get loaded *before* mod_proxy in the created >> httpd.conf. This causes httpd to fail at start as the balancer >> modules >> need symbols from proxy_util (which is linked into mod_proxy). >> > > > D'oh! Of course. We can simply define the load ordering > in register_hooks().... ignore that... this isn't a hook issue --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: testers-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: testers-help@httpd.apache.org