From edi at agharta.de  Wed Dec  1 09:08:49 2004
From: edi at agharta.de (Edi Weitz)
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 10:08:49 +0100
Subject: [mod-lisp-devel] Apache 2 support
In-Reply-To: <ubre4haro.fsf@agharta.de> (Edi Weitz's message of "Thu, 11 Nov
	2004 12:42:51 +0100")
References: <uekj2u2v9.fsf@agharta.de> <058701c4c747$a985cc20$0a02a8c0@marcxp>
	<uy8h9k1ml.fsf@agharta.de> <060901c4c754$3538ed40$0a02a8c0@marcxp>
	<uis8cisjb.fsf@agharta.de> <083501c4c7e2$387255d0$0a02a8c0@marcxp>
	<ubre4haro.fsf@agharta.de>
Message-ID: <uwtw21j32.fsf@agharta.de>

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 12:42:51 +0100, Edi Weitz <edi at agharta.de> wrote:

> Just for fun here's what I have now - see attachment.

I received this a couple of minutes ago but it was sent on Nov 11. Are
there again problems with the c-l.net mailing lists?

Cheers,
Edi.



From marc.battyani at fractalconcept.com  Wed Dec  1 09:27:47 2004
From: marc.battyani at fractalconcept.com (Marc Battyani)
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 10:27:47 +0100
Subject: [mod-lisp-devel] Apache 2 support
References: <uekj2u2v9.fsf@agharta.de>
	<058701c4c747$a985cc20$0a02a8c0@marcxp><uy8h9k1ml.fsf@agharta.de>
	<060901c4c754$3538ed40$0a02a8c0@marcxp><uis8cisjb.fsf@agharta.de>
	<083501c4c7e2$387255d0$0a02a8c0@marcxp><ubre4haro.fsf@agharta.de>
	<uwtw21j32.fsf@agharta.de>
Message-ID: <020c01c4d788$0684d830$0a02a8c0@marcxp>

"Edi Weitz" <edi at agharta.de> wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 12:42:51 +0100, Edi Weitz <edi at agharta.de> wrote:
>
> > Just for fun here's what I have now - see attachment.
>
> I received this a couple of minutes ago but it was sent on Nov 11. Are
> there again problems with the c-l.net mailing lists?

Probably, as you may have noticed on the cl-pdf-devel mailing list
yesterday, the messages are forwarded with a very long delay (up to several
hours) and in a wrong order.

Cheers,

Marc




From edi at agharta.de  Mon Dec 27 12:45:18 2004
From: edi at agharta.de (Edi Weitz)
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 13:45:18 +0100
Subject: [mod-lisp-devel] Patch: mod_lisp2 and HEAD requests
Message-ID: <umzvzx63l.fsf@agharta.de>

Hi!

mod_lisp2 will hang if the Lisp side sends a non-empty body although
the browser sent a HEAD request.  Here's a little patch that tries to
fix this.  (Read from the Lisp socket but don't write to the client.
Is there a better way to do that?)

Cheers,
Edi.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: mod_lisp2.diff
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 3296 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mailman.common-lisp.net/pipermail/mod-lisp-devel/attachments/20041227/ebc8ea5c/attachment.bin>

From edi at agharta.de  Mon Dec 27 13:24:26 2004
From: edi at agharta.de (Edi Weitz)
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 14:24:26 +0100
Subject: [mod-lisp-devel] Patch: mod_lisp2 and HEAD requests
In-Reply-To: <umzvzx63l.fsf@agharta.de> (Edi Weitz's message of "Mon, 27 Dec
	2004 13:45:18 +0100")
References: <umzvzx63l.fsf@agharta.de>
Message-ID: <uis6nx4ad.fsf@agharta.de>

On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 13:45:18 +0100, Edi Weitz <edi at agharta.de> wrote:

> mod_lisp2 will hang if the Lisp side sends a non-empty body although
> the browser sent a HEAD request.  Here's a little patch that tries
> to fix this.  (Read from the Lisp socket but don't write to the
> client.  Is there a better way to do that?)

Now that I think of it a little bit more I'm not so sure what's the
right way to handle this.  A proper reply (from the server to the
client) to a HEAD request will include the correct Content-Length
header.  However, in mod_lisp the Content-Length header sent by the
Lisp process is used to indicate to Apache if Lisp wants to send a
body, i.e. there seems to be no way for the Lisp side to handle HEAD
request in such a way that the content isn't generated but the browser
gets the correct Content-Length header anyway.

Or am I missing something?

Cheers,
Edi.



From marc.battyani at fractalconcept.com  Mon Dec 27 15:32:52 2004
From: marc.battyani at fractalconcept.com (Marc Battyani)
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 16:32:52 +0100
Subject: [mod-lisp-devel] Patch: mod_lisp2 and HEAD requests
References: <umzvzx63l.fsf@agharta.de> <uis6nx4ad.fsf@agharta.de>
Message-ID: <026501c4ec29$67b2ec90$0a02a8c0@marcxp>

Edi Weitz <edi at agharta.de> wrote:

> On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 13:45:18 +0100, Edi Weitz <edi at agharta.de> wrote:
>
> > mod_lisp2 will hang if the Lisp side sends a non-empty body although
> > the browser sent a HEAD request.  Here's a little patch that tries
> > to fix this.  (Read from the Lisp socket but don't write to the
> > client.  Is there a better way to do that?)
>
> Now that I think of it a little bit more I'm not so sure what's the
> right way to handle this.  A proper reply (from the server to the
> client) to a HEAD request will include the correct Content-Length
> header.  However, in mod_lisp the Content-Length header sent by the
> Lisp process is used to indicate to Apache if Lisp wants to send a
> body, i.e. there seems to be no way for the Lisp side to handle HEAD
> request in such a way that the content isn't generated but the browser
> gets the correct Content-Length header anyway.

Maybe we could add a Lisp-Content-Length that would be used for the socket
keep alive stuff and just pass the Content-Length to Apache. Or better a new
HTTP-Content-Length header so that it's still compatible with the current
protocol.

Cheers,

Marc




From edi at agharta.de  Mon Dec 27 17:24:33 2004
From: edi at agharta.de (Edi Weitz)
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 18:24:33 +0100
Subject: [mod-lisp-devel] Patch: mod_lisp2 and HEAD requests
In-Reply-To: <026501c4ec29$67b2ec90$0a02a8c0@marcxp> (Marc Battyani's
	message of "Mon, 27 Dec 2004 16:32:52 +0100")
References: <umzvzx63l.fsf@agharta.de> <uis6nx4ad.fsf@agharta.de>
	<026501c4ec29$67b2ec90$0a02a8c0@marcxp>
Message-ID: <usm5rodri.fsf@agharta.de>

On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 16:32:52 +0100, "Marc Battyani" <marc.battyani at fractalconcept.com> wrote:

> Maybe we could add a Lisp-Content-Length that would be used for the
> socket keep alive stuff and just pass the Content-Length to
> Apache. Or better a new HTTP-Content-Length header so that it's
> still compatible with the current protocol.

I've added a "Lisp-Content-Length" header for both versions (see
attachment) that can be used to overwrite the normal "Content-Lenght"
value:

1. "Content-Length" is used for the header sent to the browser.

2. If "Lisp-Content-Length" is also specified and sent after the
   "Content-Length" header then this is supposed to be the length of
   the body sent by Lisp.  Otherwise "Content-Length" is used as
   before.

This should be compatible with old applications.

Cheers,
Edi.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: mod_lisp.c
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 47847 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mailman.common-lisp.net/pipermail/mod-lisp-devel/attachments/20041227/73dc444e/attachment.obj>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: mod_lisp2.c
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 24212 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mailman.common-lisp.net/pipermail/mod-lisp-devel/attachments/20041227/73dc444e/attachment-0001.obj>

From marc.battyani at fractalconcept.com  Mon Dec 27 18:47:03 2004
From: marc.battyani at fractalconcept.com (Marc Battyani)
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 19:47:03 +0100
Subject: [mod-lisp-devel] Patch: mod_lisp2 and HEAD requests
References: <umzvzx63l.fsf@agharta.de>
	<uis6nx4ad.fsf@agharta.de><026501c4ec29$67b2ec90$0a02a8c0@marcxp>
	<usm5rodri.fsf@agharta.de>
Message-ID: <02d601c4ec44$87c8edc0$0a02a8c0@marcxp>

"Edi Weitz" <edi at agharta.de> wrote:

> On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 16:32:52 +0100, "Marc Battyani"
<marc.battyani at fractalconcept.com> wrote:
>
> > Maybe we could add a Lisp-Content-Length that would be used for the
> > socket keep alive stuff and just pass the Content-Length to
> > Apache. Or better a new HTTP-Content-Length header so that it's
> > still compatible with the current protocol.
>
> I've added a "Lisp-Content-Length" header for both versions (see
> attachment) that can be used to overwrite the normal "Content-Lenght"
> value:
>
> 1. "Content-Length" is used for the header sent to the browser.
>
> 2. If "Lisp-Content-Length" is also specified and sent after the
>    "Content-Length" header then this is supposed to be the length of
>    the body sent by Lisp.  Otherwise "Content-Length" is used as
>    before.
>
> This should be compatible with old applications.

Good. I've updated the repository.

Cheers,

Marc