* Christian Parpart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Actually you don't need to patch httpd-2.0 for *that*. You can write a
> > small module, which registers the mapper function at runtime.
>
> This is a way to much overhead, just for this function, isn't it?
Given the fact, that the 2.0 architecture is built for such extensions -
not much. And compared to the effort of maintaining a patch... ;-)
> > (I'm a happy Gentoo user, though I'm naturally using my
> > own httpd ebuild ;-))
>
> *heh*... however, it's not really nice (personally) to read, that you're
> using your own ebuild. I hope the next ebuild updates in future (mid
> december) will change your mind ;-)
Probably not. I'm using some own patches, different config scheme, etc., but
I'll look at it from time to time to see what happens to the httpd :)
> > However, I think, the map is way too special for common inclusion. A
> > better way would be to provide a general replace map (starting with 2.1,
> > I'd suggest). For 2.0 releases the small support module should be enough.
> > How does this sound?
>
> That replace map sounds great to me. this would fill the requirements for
> MediaWiki (easily) and could be use for more general purposes as well.
>
> However, I fear a bit for the syntax to be used in httpd.conf then since I'm
> not that creative ATM.
Something like:
RewriteMap replace int:replace
RewriteRule (.*) ${replace:x|y}
'misusing' the default value, which isn't even needed in that case. Though
this would require some more code changes in mod_rewrite (passing the default
value to the map), this sounds like a good idea to me - and should not be in
2.0.
> I submitted a patch in [1] just before I read your mail. I'm willing to
> spend some time tonight to write that module - but I'll maybe need some help
> anyway. lets see.
No problem. It reminds (e.g. me) that there's something open ;)
nd
--
"Umfassendes Werk (auch fuer Umsteiger vom Apache 1.3)"
-- aus einer Rezension
<http://pub.perlig.de/books.html#apache2>
