Just wanted to note that the difference in the behavior is also related to a struts merge where the struts module config has an action defined with the "unknown" attribute (making it like a default). I think the missing condition is that we check to see if the GlobalApp has the action config but we don't check any of the action configs on the global app to see if they're "unknown".
So, If the global app includes a Struts Merge and that struts module config includes an unknown action, we'll never hit it. Carlin On 1/5/06, Carlin Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hey Rich, > > Hope your work is going well! > > I have a question about svn revision 356056 ( > http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi?rev=356056&view=rev > ) checked in as a fix for BEEHIVE-1024. It seems that it changed the > behavior of PageFlowRequestProcessor.processMapping() and how we handle an > unknown action. With this change, the code path for an unknown action in > processMapping() fails the new check to see if it is in the globalApp > (...globalApp.findActionConfig(path) != null). We drop to the else statement > and into a call to processUnresolvedAction() which uses the > DefaultExceptionsHandler class and eventually writes out the HTML of our > action not found error message directly to the response. I think this looks > OK. However, having the error message written to the response may not be the > desired behavior for something like a portal using a call to > PageFlowUtils.strutsLookup(). What do you think? > > If we leave the fix as is, could we use the > PageFlowRequestWrapper.isScopedLookup() condition to determine if this is > from strutsLookup() or not before calling processUnresolvedAction(). I.E. > do something different for an unknown action in a strutsLookup()? Just > curious. > > Thanks, > Carlin >
