On 08/04/2007 02:08 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
> On Sat, 04 Aug 2007 13:35:20 +0200
> Ruediger Pluem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> The patch there doesn't address this issue either: both headers_out
> and r->content_encoding are empty at the point where we check
> (in my simple mod_asis test).
> 
> As regards PR42993 (which was not even filed when I committed the
> first version of this update, for the input filter only), I'd have
> thought a simpler fix would be to merge r->content_encoding into
> the headers if it's non-null.  But I'd rather figure out a general
> fix than hack around it in mod_deflate only to see it popping up
> in other filters.

This is a good plan. Agreed.

> 
> 
>>> +   /* these are unlikely to be set anyway, but ... */
>>> +        apr_table_unset(r->headers_out, "Content-Length");
>>> +        apr_table_unset(r->headers_out, "Content-MD5");
>>> +        apr_table_unset(r->headers_out, "Content-Range");
>> I agree with Joe's comment a while a ago that we simply should remove
>> ourselves if we see a Content-Range header (in both cases input and
>> output filter). I think we can only deliver a result in this case
>> that is not expected by the client. It might
>> make even sense that in the output filter case we return a 416 if the
>> request headers contain a Range header.
> 
> Agreed, but I think that's really a separate issue.  Actually for the
> output filters, we should be using the protocol flags
> AP_FILTER_PROTO_CHANGE|AP_FILTER_PROTO_CHANGE_LENGTH|AP_FILTER_PROTO_NO_BYTERANGE
> 
> This is really why I started out fixing just the input filter - I didn't
> plan to think through the extra complexities in the output:-)
> 
> If it'll get your vote, I'll change all three filters to remove
> themselves and log a warning if called with a byterange.  But that
> feels to me like a separate patch.

Ok. This is fine with me, but before I put my vote on this it is needed that
we no longer fail the test that Joe mentioned (the one related to 
Content-Length).
I do not want to introduce a regression here. Once this is done, the bytereange
issue can be addressed separately as you proposed as it seems to be broken
currently anyway.


Regards

Ru"diger


Reply via email to