I saw something similar to this in the list archives -- something Gerald responded
with to someone who was having a similar problem (or so it seems), back in 2002. He
said use this:
[- $req = shift -]
[- $path = $req -> component -> cwd -]
If I use this I would have to:
open (FILEHANDLE, $path.'sites.txt') or die 'Cannot open sites.txt: '.$!;
instead of what I'm using below, right? I'm not really sure if what your
$myactualpath will be universally applicable or not(?). Is it common knowledge that
in Embperl 2 one cannot access files relative to the current file executed, or am I
misunderstanding?
Thanks,
Philippe
-----Original Message-----
From: Carlos Kassab [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 5:06 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Hall, Philippe
Subject: Re: pwd is '/' ???
To get my actual path i am doing this:
$myactualpath = substr($epreq -> param -> filename,0,length($epreq -> param ->
filename)-9);
I hope this helps
CKG
El Jue 27 May 2004 15:18, Hall, Philippe escribió:
> Ok I'll say up front that this is my first time setting up EmbPerl 2 and
> Apache 2, but I've used EmbPerl 1.3 for a few years now. Here's my issue,
> which I just discovered about an hour ago:
>
> I have an .epl, subs.epl, which renders fine. I have the following line of
> code that is dying:
>
> open (FILEHANDLE, 'sites.txt') or die 'Cannot open sites.txt: '.$!;
>
> And 'sites.txt' does exist in the same directory as subs.epl, and the
> permissions are all good. The page dies and I get a file not found error
> from embperl. So, to debug, I added the following line above my filehandle
> open:
>
> [- print OUT `pwd`; -]
>
> Strangely enough, my pwd is '/'. Since I'm in the process of migrating
> from my old Embperl 1.3 box to this new box, I added the same print
> statement to the 1.3 counterpart of subs.epl. The pwd on that box is
> correct -- the directory containing subs.epl (as expected).
>
> So does anyone know why I'm getting this behavior in Embperl 2.0?
>
> Another thing I notice (but presumably unrelated): I can't have more than
> one statement in a [+ +] block any more... is that right? I get a syntax
> error.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Philippe
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Carlos Kassab
Consultor
CKG Consultores
Tel. (33) 36 20 55 51
Cel. 044 33 11 05 96 62
email1: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
email2: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://infotarif.eplsite.com
http://www.eplsite.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
