backport mod_reqtimeout with handshake support

Bug #1833781 reported by Jesse Williamson
10
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
apache2 (Ubuntu)
Invalid
Wishlist
Jesse Williamson
Xenial
Won't Fix
Undecided
Unassigned
Bionic
Won't Fix
Undecided
Unassigned
Cosmic
Won't Fix
Undecided
Unassigned
Disco
Won't Fix
Undecided
Unassigned

Bug Description

While mod_reqtimeout has been present since 2.2.15, the handshake parameter to RequestReadTimeout
was not added until 2.4.39.

The attached patch is for apache2_2.4.18-2ubuntu3.10 (Xenial), and will need to be backported to other versions.

Tags: sts
Revision history for this message
Jesse Williamson (chardan) wrote :
Revision history for this message
Christian Ehrhardt  (paelzer) wrote :

This looks like a feature request to me, is there a bug that would make this SRUable since you added a xenial diff?

Further it is quite some code and due to that more regression risk - so without a broken use case that will be hard.

I'd ask you to provide a full SRU template [1] before going on with it.

Changed in apache2 (Ubuntu Xenial):
status: New → Won't Fix
Changed in apache2 (Ubuntu Bionic):
status: New → Won't Fix
Changed in apache2 (Ubuntu Cosmic):
status: New → Won't Fix
Changed in apache2 (Ubuntu Disco):
status: New → Won't Fix
Eric Desrochers (slashd)
tags: added: sts
Revision history for this message
Jesse Williamson (chardan) wrote :

Hi Christian, I think I have jumped the gun here process-wise-- my apologies. I didn't realize that attaching the patchfile would trigger notifications. This is not yet ready for SRU, I'll be making revisions, please do not use. Sorry for the confusion!

Revision history for this message
Bryce Harrington (bryce) wrote :

Hi Jesse, per your comment that the debdiff is WIP, I'm going to close this bug out as invalid. Please feel free to reopen when it's ready for others to look at, or go ahead and file a new bug report if you'd prefer a clean start. I'd echo what Christian said - the SRU process is stringent for changes, so keeping changes to a minimum will aid in making reviewing easier, and thus makes the SRU process move swifter. He's also right that SRUs are more geared towards addressing severe bugs, rather than new features.

In case Christian's link to the SRU process didn't make it through, here it is again:
  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates

Offhand, in looking at what versions we're carrying I see ubuntu is still carrying 2.4.38 in eoan, so perhaps a next action would be moving to 2.4.39.

Changed in apache2 (Ubuntu):
importance: Low → Wishlist
status: New → Invalid
Revision history for this message
Bryce Harrington (bryce) wrote :

Jesse, I've filed LP: #1834359 and subscribed you, for trying to get 2.4.39 into eoan. Since that may require jumping ahead of debian, rationale about the benefits may help with the justification, so your input would be welcome.

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.