On Mon, May 06, 2002 at 03:10:32AM -0400, Cliff Woolley wrote: > On Mon, 6 May 2002, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > > > Hint: look at apr_dbm_open_ex. =) -- justin > > I know that, I've been looking at it for like an hour now. :) That's > why I said "dbm" would get translated into "default" by mod_rewrite. I > almost explicitly said: > > apr_dbm_open_ex(..., "default", ...) > > in my last email. Ugh. ;] You didn't answer my question though. Is it > acceptable for > > RewriteMap mydbm dbm:/path/to/dbm > > to mean apr_dbm_open_ex(..., "default", ...) ?
What I was thinking was: RewriteMap mydbm default:/path/to/dbm since apr_dbm_open_ex could handle that. (The dbm->default mapping makes a lot of sense to maintain backwards compatibility.) But (as you just pointed out to me on IRC), RewriteMap can also take txt, prg, etc. So, having "default" may be ambiguous. Your call if you want to allow "default" as a type - I think it may be more hassle to prevent default than it would be to just allow it. -- justin
