The following reply was made to PR mod_rewrite/2931; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Jay Soffian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject: Re: mod_rewrite/2931: mod_rewrite -U switch in combination with [P] rule doesn't work properly Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1998 07:42:36 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] once said: | |Thank you very much for your problem report. |It has the internal identification `mod_rewrite/2931'. |The individual assigned to look at your |report is: apache. | |>Category: mod_rewrite |>Responsible: apache |>Synopsis: mod_rewrite -U switch in combination with [P] rule doesn't wo |rk properly |>Arrival-Date: Mon Aug 31 07:50:01 PDT 1998 Argh. I figured this out I think. Unfortunately, the '-U' switch doesn't check for the existance of a document, it just checks to see if the URL is valid (meaning it passes auth and access checks, is in a document root or aliased, etc). You have to actually do a run_sub_req to find out if the document is servable, and that then serves the document, which is not what we want. What we do want is the ability to proxypass every URL that fails on the local server to a remote server. The local server acts as a stage, so any content that is missing on the stage needs to get filled in from the live server. We need to be able to do this for <!--#include virtual's as well though, so it can't be done just by a CGI error document processor. (And in fact can't be done by mod_rewrite either since it doesn't allow for proxy'ing sub_req's, though we've locally removed that restriction from the code.) There isn't really a good way to do this other than doing a bunch of -f and -d checks, and that is a pain. j. -- Jay Soffian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> UNIX Systems Administrator 404.572.1941 Cox Interactive Media
