On 06/16/2009 11:57 PM, [email protected] wrote: > Author: niq > Date: Tue Jun 16 21:57:25 2009 > New Revision: 785425 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=785425&view=rev > Log: > Add DefaultHandler directive to mod_dir. > PR 47184 > > Modified: > httpd/httpd/trunk/CHANGES > httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/mappers/mod_dir.c > > > Modified: httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/mappers/mod_dir.c > URL: > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/mappers/mod_dir.c?rev=785425&r1=785424&r2=785425&view=diff > ============================================================================== > --- httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/mappers/mod_dir.c (original) > +++ httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/mappers/mod_dir.c Tue Jun 16 21:57:25 2009 > @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ > typedef struct dir_config_struct { > apr_array_header_t *index_names; > slash_cfg do_slash; > + const char *dflt; > } dir_config_rec; > > #define DIR_CMD_PERMS OR_INDEXES > @@ -82,6 +83,9 @@ > > static const command_rec dir_cmds[] = > { > + AP_INIT_TAKE1("DefaultHandler", ap_set_string_slot, > + (void*)APR_OFFSETOF(dir_config_rec, dflt), > + DIR_CMD_PERMS, "Set a default handler"), > AP_INIT_RAW_ARGS("DirectoryIndex", add_index, NULL, DIR_CMD_PERMS, > "a list of file names"), > AP_INIT_FLAG("DirectorySlash", configure_slash, NULL, DIR_CMD_PERMS, > @@ -107,9 +111,53 @@ > new->index_names = add->index_names ? add->index_names : > base->index_names; > new->do_slash = > (add->do_slash == SLASH_UNSET) ? base->do_slash : add->do_slash; > + new->dflt = add->dflt ? add->dflt : base->dflt; > return new; > } > > +static int fixup_dflt(request_rec *r) > +{ > + dir_config_rec *d = ap_get_module_config(r->per_dir_config, &dir_module); > + const char *name_ptr; > + request_rec *rr; > + int error_notfound = 0; > + if ((r->finfo.filetype != APR_NOFILE) || (r->handler != NULL)) { > + return DECLINED; > + }
Doesn't this cause issues when we have configured several different index files via DirectoryIndex and the first one of these is not present. I guess in this case the appropriate subrequest should return NOT_FOUND which it does not do here, correct? Regards Rüdiger
