Re: [Tomcat Wiki] Update of "TomcatVersions" by markt

2007-09-24 Thread jean-frederic clere
> @@ -55, +77 @@ > > ||Spec versions:||Servlet 2.5, JSP 2.1|| > ||Stable:||Yes|| > ||Enhancements:||TBD - currently Yes|| > - ||Bug Fixes:||Yes|| > + ||Bug Fixes:||TBD - currently Yes|| > - ||Security Fixes:||Yes|| > + ||Security Fixes:||TBD - currently Yes|| > + ||Process:||RTC|| > ||Lis

Re: svn commit: r578613 - in /tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk: java/org/apache/catalina/core/StandardContext.java webapps/docs/changelog.xml

2007-09-24 Thread Remy Maucherat
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Author: funkman Date: Sun Sep 23 16:53:05 2007 New Revision: 578613 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=578613&view=rev Log: bug 43453: ClassCastException at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardContext.findStatusPage(int) In reality - I don't see anywhere that calls fi

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43457] New: - Native:JK Component - Error thrown by worker ajp13

2007-09-24 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43457] - Native:JK Component - Error thrown by worker ajp13

2007-09-24 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41797] - CNFE/NPE thrown from function mapper when externalizing

2007-09-24 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43461] New: - mod_jk JkShmFile directive documentation

2007-09-24 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43461] - mod_jk JkShmFile directive documentation

2007-09-24 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43462] New: - mod_jk JkShmSize directive automatic configuration

2007-09-24 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43463] New: - Change default location of JkShmFile

2007-09-24 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43463] - Change default location of JkShmFile

2007-09-24 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43462] - mod_jk JkShmSize directive automatic configuration

2007-09-24 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43461] - mod_jk JkShmFile directive documentation

2007-09-24 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43461] - mod_jk JkShmFile directive documentation

2007-09-24 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

6.0.x request processing patch

2007-09-24 Thread Filip Hanik - Dev Lists
Currently, the RequestInfo.getRequestProcessingTime is not taking into account if the request is active or not, hence returning a larger and larger value if a new request is not received. The patch addresses the following 1. getRequestProcessingTime returns 0 if no request is active 2. getLastR

RE: 6.0.x request processing patch

2007-09-24 Thread Bill Barker
I would think that using the stage would be more reliable than hacking the startTime, but otherwise, I have no strong opinion either way. > -Original Message- > From: Filip Hanik - Dev Lists [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 11:49 AM > To: Tomcat Developers Lis

Re: 6.0.x request processing patch

2007-09-24 Thread Filip Hanik - Dev Lists
Bill Barker wrote: I would think that using the stage would be more reliable than hacking the startTime, but otherwise, I have no strong opinion either way. yes, that makes sense. Filip -Original Message- From: Filip Hanik - Dev Lists [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, Sept

Re: 6.0.x request processing patch

2007-09-24 Thread Filip Hanik - Dev Lists
here is the modified patch Filip Bill Barker wrote: I would think that using the stage would be more reliable than hacking the startTime, but otherwise, I have no strong opinion either way. -Original Message- From: Filip Hanik - Dev Lists [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, S

svn commit: r578963 - in /tomcat/sandbox/gdev6x/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net: NioBlockingSelector.java NioEndpoint.java

2007-09-24 Thread fhanik
Author: fhanik Date: Mon Sep 24 13:56:31 2007 New Revision: 578963 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=578963&view=rev Log: optimize pollers, don't lock into a blocking select if there are other things for the thread to do Modified: tomcat/sandbox/gdev6x/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/Ni

svn commit: r578980 - /tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk/STATUS

2007-09-24 Thread remm
Author: remm Date: Mon Sep 24 14:27:16 2007 New Revision: 578980 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=578980&view=rev Log: - Add status file. Added: tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk/STATUS Added: tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk/STATUS URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk/STATUS?rev=578980&view=

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43468] New: - HTMLManagerServlet NullPointerException listing context

2007-09-24 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

Tomcat 6 and Java 5 syntax

2007-09-24 Thread Lucas Galfaso
Hi, I am looking at the Tomcat 6 code and checking out the the possibility of collaborating with the project, and one thing that pops up is that the entire code base is not using Java 5 syntax. Was this syntax avoided for a specific reason? Regards, lg

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43470] New: - ClassCastException at org.apache.catalina.deploy.NamingResources

2007-09-24 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

Re: Tomcat 6 and Java 5 syntax

2007-09-24 Thread Mark Thomas
Lucas Galfaso wrote: > Hi, > I am looking at the Tomcat 6 code and checking out the the > possibility of collaborating with the project, and one thing that pops > up is that the entire code base is not using Java 5 syntax. Was this > syntax avoided for a specific reason? The code is based on (ac

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43470] - ClassCastException at org.apache.catalina.deploy.NamingResources

2007-09-24 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43470] - ClassCastException at org.apache.catalina.deploy.NamingResources

2007-09-24 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

Re: 6.0.x request processing patch

2007-09-24 Thread Rainer Jung
Hi Filip, I guess that also fixes the misleading html manager display (request times going up and up). That would be very nice. Just a quick shot: - maybe you can fix Procssing -> Processing everywhere - will this change the behaviour of the requestProcessingTime as one can retrieve from th