tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <seb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release build 4.1.39
Date Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:28:20 GMT
On 19/11/2008, Mark Thomas <markt@apache.org> wrote:
> sebb wrote:
>  > However, there are several binary files that are different:
>  >
>  > connectors/jni/native/os/win32/logmessages.bin
>  > connectors/procrun/bin.../tomcat*.exe
>  >
>  > This suggests a packaging error - perhaps these bin files were
>  > incorrectly formatted to correct the line-endings?
>
> Looks like. I'll get it fixed in svn in case there is another release.
>
>
>  > Also, the procrun/README.txt file refers to Tomcat 5 (trivial)
>
> A result of sharing connectors between 4 & 5. I'll get that fixed too.
>
>
>  > There are no top-level LICENSE and NOTICE files in the archive;
>  > instead there are various different files at different levels of the
>  > directory tree. Not every LICENSE file has an accompanying NOTICE
>  > file.
>
> A result of pulling together various source trees.
>
>
>  > The binary zip archive has several empty directories that are not in
>  > the tgz version:
>  > logs
>  > shared
>  > work
>  > common/classes
>  > common/classes
>  >
>  > Is this intentional?
>
> No, but they will be created as required.
>
>
>  > The binary archives have one copy each of tomcat4.exe and
>  > tomcat4w.exe; I presume this is the version for Intel 32 bit. Why not
>  > include the amd64 and ia64 versions as well?
>
> The packaging pre-dates those versions being available.
>
>
>  > The NOTICE and LICENSE files in the binary archive refer to several
>  > products that don't seem to be included (at least not as separate
>  > jars)
>  > JSSE
>  > JUnit
>  > pureTLS
>  > Tyrex
>
> That is me being over cautious and including all the libs you need to do a
>  full build on a pre 1.4 JDK.
>
>
>  > ===
>  >
>  > Findbugs reports lots of bugs, but I don't know if they relate to code
>  > that is actually
>  > used or not.
>  >
>  > For example, the org.apache.tomcat.util.threads.Reaper class uses a
>  > boolean field "running" to communicate with a different thread, but
>  > fails to synchronize access and does not use volatile.
>
>
> As far as I can tell, not used. There is a lot of code like that that I am
>  trying to clean up in trunk. It isn't worth the effort to back port it.
>
>
>  If we were seeing bug reports for TC4 then I'd be worried but we aren't.

Or maybe the problem only occurs occasionally, not enough to bother reporting...

>  But those people that are using TC4 seem happy with it - they just need the
>  security fixes.
>
>  I'll fix the obvious errors in case there is another 4.1.x release but I
>  don't see anything here to stop 4.1.39.
>
>
>  Mark
>
>
>
>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
>  For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org


Mime
View raw message