Hi Jeff,
Am 15.12.2012 15:00, schrieb Jeff Trawick:
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 5:04 AM, <fua...@apache.org
<mailto:fua...@apache.org>> wrote:
Author: fuankg
Date: Thu Dec 13 10:04:51 2012
New Revision: 1421184
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1421184&view=rev
<http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1421184&view=rev>
Log:
Added Windows CGI samples.
Added:
httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/docs/cgi-examples/printenv.vbs
(with props)
httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/docs/cgi-examples/printenv.wsf
(with props)
I don't understand why we ship this.
If some Windows user wants to find out how to write a CGI script in yet
another language they can bing it.
We have had a couple of very basic examples from the dark ages of the
web, and that is MUCH more than enough IMO, particularly since these
particular examples are information leaks as soon as somebody enables them.
my motivation for these was that the .vbs is like a counterpart to
test-cgi, and for the .wsf BZ 51359 to show that we dont need another
shebang test in the code. These samples are in-active same as printenv
and test-cgi (no active shebang), and if we trust that a Unix admin
knows what he does when he activates them why dont we trust a Windows
admin too?
If you think those samples are bad remove them again, but then please
also remove printenv and test-cgi which are basically same.
Gün.
