osdir.com


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.36


Oh, and it's not a regression since, at least, 2.4.34 (at least for me)

> On Oct 11, 2018, at 7:35 AM, Jim Jagielski <jim@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> FWIW, on macOS, both trunk and httpd-2.4 fail on this test:
> 
>  t/modules/buffer.t .................. 3/12 # Failed test 4 in t/modules/buffer.t at line 32
>  t/modules/buffer.t .................. 7/12 # Failed test 8 in t/modules/buffer.t at line 32 fail #2
>  t/modules/buffer.t .................. 11/12 # Failed test 12 in t/modules/buffer.t at line 32 fail #3
>  t/modules/buffer.t .................. Failed 3/12 subtests
> 
> 
>> On Oct 11, 2018, at 7:15 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group <ruediger.pluem@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 
>> Do you know if the failure is a regression over 2.4.35?
>> 
>> Regards
>> 
>> Rüdiger
>> 
>> Von: Marion et Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@xxxxxxxxxx> 
>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 11. Oktober 2018 13:13
>> An: dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Betreff: re: AW: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.36
>> 
>> Waouh!
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> This would mean I've provided a new useful test!
>> 
>> (it has been added recently in r1841508)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> :)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I definitely need to document how to generate and use test-coverage data when running the test framework.
>> 
>> This helps to spot where new tests are needed.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> CJ
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> Message du 11/10/18 10:08
>>> De : "Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group" <ruediger.pluem@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> A : "dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Copie à : 
>>> Objet : AW: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.36
>>> 
>>> Anyone else seeing
>>> 
>>> t/modules/buffer.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 12 Failed: 2)
>>> Failed tests: 8, 12
>>> 
>>> ?
>>> 
>>> I don't see this with trunk on the same machine. Issue seems to be if input filtering is on on large POSTs.
>>> 
>>> Regards
>>> 
>>> Rüdiger
>>> 
>>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>>> Von: Daniel Ruggeri <druggeri@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 11. Oktober 2018 02:27
>>>> An: dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> Betreff: Re: [VOTE] Release httpd-2.4.36
>>>> 
>>>> +1 from me (talking to myself).
>>>> 
>>>> Test environment follows. I observe only one failure of the test suite
>>>> (mentioned elsewhere) - it seems only to apply w/ OpenSSL 1.1.1 and H2.
>>>> 
>>>> system:
>>>>  kernel:
>>>>    name: Linux
>>>>    release: 3.16.0-4-amd64
>>>>    version: #1 SMP Debian 3.16.51-3 (2017-12-13)
>>>>    machine: x86_64
>>>> 
>>>>  libraries:
>>>>    openssl: "1.1.1"
>>>>    openldap: "2.4.46"
>>>>    apr: "1.6.5"
>>>>    apr-util: "1.6.1"
>>>>    iconv: "1.2.2"
>>>>    brotli: "1.0.6"
>>>>    nghttp2: "1.34.0"
>>>>    zlib: "1.2.11"
>>>>    pcre: "8.42"
>>>>    libxml2: "2.9.8"
>>>>    php: "5.6.38"
>>>>    lua: "5.3.5"
>>>>    curl: "7.61.1"
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Daniel Ruggeri
>>>> 
>>>> On 10/10/2018 2:18 PM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote:
>>>>> Hi, all;
>>>>>   Please find below the proposed release tarball and signatures:
>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/httpd/
>>>>> 
>>>>> I would like to call a VOTE over the next few days to release this
>>>>> candidate tarball as 2.4.36:
>>>>> [ ] +1: It's not just good, it's good enough!
>>>>> [ ] +0: Let's have a talk.
>>>>> [ ] -1: There's trouble in paradise. Here's what's wrong.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The computed digests of the tarball up for vote are:
>>>>> sha1: e40e7a879b84df860215b8a80f2a535534a1c4b4 *httpd-2.4.36.tar.gz
>>>>> sha256:
>>>>> ef788fb7c814acb2506a8b758a1a3f91f368f97bd4e6db16e98001f468e8e288
>>>>> *httpd-2.4.36.tar.gz
>>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>