From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 9:24 AM
> From: "Rodent of Unusual Size" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 10:11 AM > > > "Roy T. Fielding" wrote: > > > > > > Subrequests are file content inclusions, not internal redirects. > > > They aren't supposed to check Location blocks because > > > their URLs are file URLs internal to the server. > > > > I'm still not caught up on all aspects of 2.0, but that certainly > > doesn't jibe with 'include virtual=' on 1.3, which I believe was > > handled with a subrequest.. > > The patch I posted last night reverts to the 1.3 behavior, with one exception; > > sub_req_lookup_uri now perform <Location /> walks that were not performed > in Apache 1.3. They already called translate_name back in 1.3. > > Greg's and Roy's observation is that sub_req_lookup_file shouldn't perform > either of the <Location /> walks or call translate_name. In fact they are > correct, those didn't occur in 1.3 either. We simply need to call out that > sub_req_lookup_file/dirent won't perform any Location features or Translation. Important or not so important footnote. We use sub_req_lookup_dirent, which is a flavor of sub_req_lookup_file, to handle autoindex exclusions. If the user protects a <location >, that -file- can still appear in an autoindex listing. I dunno if that concerns anyone. Perhaps it should be called out in the docs. > Note one bit of grand bogusness, however. We used a very strange combination > of r->main's per_dir_config (including it's Vhost/Directory/File/Location merged > per-dir-configs, in that order) when constructing these subrequests. > > I scream uncle, what makes sense for file subrequests? Use the parent request's > Vhost+Location, then merge the correct Directory/File over that base? I have no > good answer. I'm still waiting ... nattering nabobs of negativism please revisit your assertions. Bill
