On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net> wrote: > > > Am 21.02.2017 um 22:58 schrieb Joe Orton: >> >> For cases like HttpProtocolOptions where a new directive is introduced >> to multiple active branches simultaneously, it gets awkward to use >> <IfVersion> to write conf files which use the new directive but are >> compatible across multiple versions. >> >> Triggered by a conversation with a user, but also e.g. see current test >> suite t/conf/extra.conf.in which breaks for 2.4 releases older than >> 2.4.25 with: >> >> <IfVersion >= 2.2.32> >> <VirtualHost _default_:http_strict> >> DocumentRoot @SERVERROOT@/htdocs/ >> HttpProtocolOptions Strict Require1.0 RegisteredMethods >> >> Any reason <IfDirective> is a bad idea, so we can do that more cleanly >> (... in a couple of decades time)? > > > you need to wrap that at least in <IfModule> since mod_version is not > mandatory and httpd if unforgiving for unknown options > > for the same reason the dance below is needed > > <IfModule !mod_version.c> > <IfModule mod_authz_core.c> > Require all denied > </IfModule> > <IfModule !mod_authz_core.c> > Order deny,allow > Deny from All > </IfModule> > </IfModule> > <IfModule mod_version.c> > <IfVersion < 2.4> > Order deny,allow > Deny from all > </IfVersion> > <IfVersion >= 2.4> > Require all denied > </IfVersion> > </IfModule>
Kind of weird to keep the <IfVersion-dependent branch in this example. -- Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com
