Re: [PATCH] Squid host rewrite for intercepted https requests

If there is not any objection I will commit this patch to trunk.
From what I can see this patch solves the bug 2976 too. Am I correct?
Should I close the bug 2976 too? (and probably commit the patch with
--fixes flag)

On 06/14/2012 02:47 AM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> On 14.06.2012 09:01, Tsantilas Christos wrote:
>> Here is a patch which implements Alex proposal.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Christos
>>
>> On 06/08/2012 05:52 PM, Alex Rousskov wrote:
>>> On 06/08/2012 06:00 AM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>>>> On 8/06/2012 9:23 p.m., Alexander Komyagin wrote:
>>>>> Hello Alex!
>>>>>
>>>
>>> If they are cbdata, let's just lock/release them properly, without ever
>>> freeing/deleting them explicitly. My understanding is that the following
>>> is necessary to fix the underlying problem:
>>>
>>> 1. add_http_port() needs to lock the new port pointer before linking it.
>>> 2. parsePortCfg() needs to lock the new port pointer before linking it.
>>> 3. free_PortCfg() needs to unlock the old port pointer before unlinking
>>> it. It should not delete the old pointer.
>>>
>>> Anything else?
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>>
>>> Alex.
>>>
>
> +1. looks okay. if it runs please apply.
>
> NP: Committer please also remove the comment "BUG 2976: Squid only
> accepts intercepted HTTP." in prepareTransparentURL()
>
>
> Amos
>
Received on Fri Jun 15 2012 - 15:17:27 MDT