I stumbled across some code in trunk for this. I had a poke around and as far as
I can tell this hasn't been supported for quite some time. What do people think
about removing it from mod_jk and trunk?
Mark
-
To unsubscribe, e-m
Hi, Mark.
> The unsupported Tomcat 3.x, 4.0.x and 5.0.x versions may be also affected
I checked Tomcat 5.0.x source code and I've found that
org.apache.coyote.http11.filters.SavedRequestInputFilter is NOT included.
Does this mean Tomcat 5.0.x is not affected by this vulnerability?
Advice, please
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46802
Rainer Jung changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
On 05.03.2009 09:23, Mark Thomas wrote:
I stumbled across some code in trunk for this. I had a poke around and as far as
I can tell this hasn't been supported for quite some time. What do people think
about removing it from mod_jk and trunk?
It is very unlikely, that it still works (although I
On 05.03.2009 07:38, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
On 19.02.2009 16:39, Mladen Turk wrote:
Hi,
We have a bug in 1.2.27 that cause core in some configuration
scenarios (#46352). The fix is in the SVN for more then a month.
Beyond that there are two additional bug fixes
one preventing Ne
Mark Thomas wrote:
I stumbled across some code in trunk for this. I had a poke around and as far as
I can tell this hasn't been supported for quite some time. What do people think
about removing it from mod_jk and trunk?
It is already disabled by default. You need a special configure flag
--en
On 05.03.2009 07:50, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
Do you want to do the next steps, or should I?
BTW, I'd like that we this time use the common
httpd 2.0 and 2.2 versions for producing the
binaries. For 2.0 I'd suggest 2.0.52 (or 2.0.49)
and for 2.2 version 2.2.3.
For 1.3, 1.3.23 sh
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46802
--- Comment #2 from Rajat 2009-03-05 01:01:34 PST ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> The page says "IIS 5 and later".
>
> Also note, that
>
> http://www.apache.org/dist/tomcat/tomcat-connectors/jk/binaries/win64/jk-1.2.27/ia64/
>
> cont
Mladen Turk wrote:
> Mark Thomas wrote:
>> I stumbled across some code in trunk for this. I had a poke around and
>> as far as
>> I can tell this hasn't been supported for quite some time. What do
>> people think
>> about removing it from mod_jk and trunk?
>>
>
> It is already disabled by default.
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46802
--- Comment #3 from Rainer Jung 2009-03-05 01:18:19
PST ---
Bugzilla is not a support forum. Please proceed this discussion on the users
list.
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
---
On 05.03.2009 10:03, Mark Thomas wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
I stumbled across some code in trunk for this. I had a poke around and
as far as
I can tell this hasn't been supported for quite some time. What do
people think
about removing it from mod_jk and trunk?
It is already
Rainer Jung wrote:
On 05.03.2009 10:03, Mark Thomas wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
I stumbled across some code in trunk for this. I had a poke around and
as far as
I can tell this hasn't been supported for quite some time. What do
people think
about removing it from mod_jk and tr
Rainer Jung wrote:
On 05.03.2009 07:50, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
Do you want to do the next steps, or should I?
BTW, I'd like that we this time use the common
httpd 2.0 and 2.2 versions for producing the
binaries. For 2.0 I'd suggest 2.0.52 (or 2.0.49)
and for 2.2 version 2.2.3
On 05.03.2009 10:38, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
On 05.03.2009 07:50, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
Do you want to do the next steps, or should I?
BTW, I'd like that we this time use the common
httpd 2.0 and 2.2 versions for producing the
binaries. For 2.0 I'd suggest 2.0
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46764
--- Comment #2 from Sergio Montesa 2009-03-05 02:52:19 PST
---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Can you please supply the simplest JSP that exhibits this error on a clean
> 6.0.18 installation.
My code is as follows:
URL urlXMLIdioma=new
Author: rjung
Date: Thu Mar 5 11:13:05 2009
New Revision: 750420
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=750420&view=rev
Log:
Mark jni related options as deprecated in the help
message and add a warning at the end of configure if
user enables jni.
Modified:
tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/co
Author: rjung
Date: Thu Mar 5 11:41:25 2009
New Revision: 750428
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=750428&view=rev
Log:
Add a deprecation log warning when a JNI worker
is instantiated.
Modified:
tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/common/jk_jni_worker.c
Modified: tomcat/connectors/trunk/j
Author: rjung
Date: Thu Mar 5 11:42:14 2009
New Revision: 750429
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=750429&view=rev
Log:
Add deprecation warning about JNI to the docs.
Modified:
tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/xdocs/generic_howto/workers.xml
tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/xdocs/miscellaneous/c
nambo.k...@oss.ntt.co.jp wrote:
> Hi, Mark.
>
>> The unsupported Tomcat 3.x, 4.0.x and 5.0.x versions may be also affected
> I checked Tomcat 5.0.x source code and I've found that
> org.apache.coyote.http11.filters.SavedRequestInputFilter is NOT included.
> Does this mean Tomcat 5.0.x is not affe
On 05.03.2009 10:36, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
On 05.03.2009 10:03, Mark Thomas wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
I stumbled across some code in trunk for this. I had a poke around and
as far as
I can tell this hasn't been supported for quite some time. What do
people t
Author: rjung
Date: Thu Mar 5 12:21:46 2009
New Revision: 750438
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=750438&view=rev
Log:
Fix typo that breaks compilation.
Modified:
tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/apache-1.3/mod_jk.c
Modified: tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/apache-1.3/mod_jk.c
URL:
Author: rjung
Date: Thu Mar 5 13:52:03 2009
New Revision: 750459
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=750459&view=rev
Log:
Add 2009 news to the docs front page.
Modified:
tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/xdocs/index.xml
Modified: tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/xdocs/index.xml
URL:
http://svn.apache
Hi,
I uploaded testing tarballs of mod_jk 1.2.28-dev to
http://tomcat.apache.org/dev/dist/tomcat-connectors/jk/source
CAUTION: at this point in time the web server still shows the older
revision 750390. The revision I uploaded last was 750438. I already
waited 2 hours, but the sync seems to t
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46803
Summary: Configuration fix for jsvc daemon
Product: Tomcat 6
Version: 6.0.18
Platform: Other
OS/Version: AIX
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Please go ahead and remove it.
10 years ago it seemed a good idea to avoid the IPC. Now it seems even
running them
on the same machine is obsolete.
Costin
On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 1:03 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
> Mladen Turk wrote:
> > Mark Thomas wrote:
> >> I stumbled across some code in trunk for
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46792
Mark Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEEDINFO|RESOLVED
Resolution|
> Please go ahead and remove it.
> 10 years ago it seemed a good idea to avoid the IPC. Now it seems even
> running them
> on the same machine is obsolete.
+1
The simpler the better and we're in cloud computing today :)
-
To uns
Costin Manolache wrote:
Please go ahead and remove it.
10 years ago it seemed a good idea to avoid the IPC. Now it seems even
running them
on the same machine is obsolete.
LOL. But don't forget the good old one ...
What goes around, comes around
Cheers
--
^(TM)
--
On Mar 5, 2009, at 4:36 AM, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
On 05.03.2009 10:03, Mark Thomas wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
I stumbled across some code in trunk for this. I had a poke
around and
as far as
I can tell this hasn't been supported for quite some time. What
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46807
Summary: Cannot disable jsp tag pooling
Product: Tomcat 6
Version: 6.0.18
Platform: PC
OS/Version: Windows XP
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44382
--- Comment #18 from Jim Manico 2009-03-05 12:47:18 PST ---
As the original poster of the feature request back in Feb 08, I want to extend
my sincere gratitude to the Mark and the Tomcat team for adding this patch to
trunk!
Thank you
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46807
--- Comment #1 from Eric Abbott 2009-03-05 14:00:43
PST ---
It appears that once a jsp is compiled (pre or live), tag pooling is no longer
changeable via web.xml nor the jvm compiler flag.
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46807
--- Comment #2 from Eric Abbott 2009-03-05 15:05:32
PST ---
http://tomcat.apache.org/tomcat-6.0-doc/jasper-howto.html
The documentation is misleading when it states:
"Use java system property at server runtime to disable tag pooling
o
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46808
Summary: mod_jk 1.2.27 can't detect network error
Product: Tomcat Connectors
Version: 1.2.27
Platform: PC
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: minor
Priority
On 05.03.2009 15:23, Rainer Jung wrote:
Hi,
I uploaded testing tarballs of mod_jk 1.2.28-dev to
http://tomcat.apache.org/dev/dist/tomcat-connectors/jk/source
CAUTION: at this point in time the web server still shows the older
revision 750390. The revision I uploaded last was 750438. I already
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46808
--- Comment #1 from Mladen Turk 2009-03-05 23:38:00 PST ---
Your patch breaks other things that are more important.
The check fof busy is deliberate because athough one connection can be
rejected others might still work. This would mea
Rainer Jung wrote:
On 05.03.2009 15:23, Rainer Jung wrote:
Hi,
I uploaded testing tarballs of mod_jk 1.2.28-dev to
http://tomcat.apache.org/dev/dist/tomcat-connectors/jk/source
CAUTION: at this point in time the web server still shows the older
revision 750390. The revision I uploaded last wa
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46808
--- Comment #2 from Rainer Jung 2009-03-05 23:51:05
PST ---
I'm also investigating this and try to fully understand all implications of
r647085 ( https://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi?view=rev&rev=647085 )
One first question (to Mladen)
On 06.03.2009 08:39, Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
On 05.03.2009 15:23, Rainer Jung wrote:
Hi,
I uploaded testing tarballs of mod_jk 1.2.28-dev to
http://tomcat.apache.org/dev/dist/tomcat-connectors/jk/source
CAUTION: at this point in time the web server still shows the older
revisio
39 matches
Mail list logo
