On Wednesday 28 November 2012 16:14:16 Maxim Dounin wrote:
> Hello!
>
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 02:54:02PM +0400, Valentin V. Bartenev wrote:
> > On Wednesday 28 November 2012 13:45:54 Christoph Schug wrote:
> > > On 2012-11-27 23:32, Valentin V. Bartenev wrote:
> > > > Don't worry, it's indeed minor adjustments while applying.
> > > > It should work as well as with the previous nginx version.
> > >
> > > Great, thanks for confirmation. If anyone is interested for reasons of
> > > convenience, I applied the patch to nginx 1.3.9, resolved the rejects
> > > and did a fresh unified diff.
> >
> > Rejects? Are you sure? Could you show me them? Because I see only some
> > small offsets and two little fuzz:
> >
> > vbart@vbart-laptop nginx-1.3.9 % patch -p0 < patch.spdy.txt
> > patching file src/http/ngx_http_spdy.h
> > patching file src/http/ngx_http.h
> > Hunk #1 succeeded at 24 (offset 1 line).
> > Hunk #2 succeeded at 39 (offset 1 line).
> > Hunk #3 succeeded at 94 (offset 8 lines).
> > Hunk #4 succeeded at 113 with fuzz 1 (offset 10 lines).
> > Hunk #5 succeeded at 121 (offset 10 lines).
>
> [...]
>
> > No rejects.
>
> What about just producing a new patch? It would be easier for
> anyone who use it.
>
> There is more than one patch(1) implementations floating around,
> and I wouldn't be surprised fuzz in one of them will be reject in
> another one.

Ok, you're right, I haven't been thought that this time the problem
is so serious.

The patch was updated:
http://nginx.org/patches/spdy/patch.spdy-54.txt

wbr, Valentin V. Bartenev

--
http://nginx.com/support.html
http://nginx.org/en/donation.html

_______________________________________________
nginx mailing list
nginx@nginx.org
http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx