On Mon, 10 Apr 2006 16:01:29 -0500 "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Nick Kew wrote: > > On Monday 10 April 2006 20:59, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > >>* Prevent r->parsed_uri.path from being NULL as this can cause segmentation > >> faults e.g. in mod_cache. Set it to "/" in this case. > > > > > > A better fix to that would surely be for apr_uri to guarantee > > setting path to non-null on parsing a URI. That way it gets set > > exactly when a URI is parsed. > > +1. However, the exact scenario is > > GET http://somehost.example.com HTTP/1.1 > > is this even legal? If so, what does 2616 have to say about it? If it says > to promote this to a http://somehost.example.com (based on scheme http/https) > then it doesn't hurt to do so. This gets around the issue of caching > three copies, one of http://somehost.example.com, http://somehost.example.com/ > and http://somehost.example.com/index.html > > Bill > 3.2.2 http URL The "http" scheme is used to locate network resources via the HTTP protocol. This section defines the scheme-specific syntax and semantics for http URLs. http_URL = "http:" "//" host [ ":" port ] [ abs_path [ "?" query ]] ... If the abs_path is not present in the URL, it MUST be given as "/" when used as a Request-URI for a resource (section 5.1.2). ... 3.2.3 URI Comparison .. - An empty abs_path is equivalent to an abs_path of "/". .. It is legal. And Nick is right, that should be fixed in apr_uri. I will send a patch tomorrow. Davi Arnaut
