Now THAT makes perfect sense to me! However that's not what you'll find here: http://www.perldoc.com/cpan/Apache/AuthCookie.html
This will step through the require directives you've given for protected documents and make sure the user passes muster. The require valid-user and require user joey-jojo directives are handled for you. You can implement custom directives, such as require species hamster, by defining a method called hamster() in your subclass, which will then be called. The method will be called as $r->hamster($r, $args), where $args is everything on your require line after the word hamster. The method should return OK on success and FORBIDDEN on failure. Here you'll say that it'll call the method hamster! What do you think of that ? Typo ? > it's the other way round: > > if you say in httpd.conf > require species hamster > > Apache::AuthCookie will call > species() in your subclass and passing "haster" in $args > > >From perldoc Apache::AuthCookie: > > o authorize() > This will step through the "require" directives you've > given for protected documents and make sure the user > passes muster. The "require valid-user" and "require > user joey-jojo" directives are handled for you. You > can implement custom directives, such as "require > species hamster", by defining a method called > "species()" in your subclass, which will then be > called. The method will be called as "$r->species($r, > $args)", where "$args" is everything on your "require" > line after the word "hamster". The method > should return OK on success and FORBIDDEN on failure. > > -- > #!/usr/bin/perl http://domm.zsi.at > for(ref bless{},just'another'perl'hacker){s-:+-$"-g&&print$_.$/} >
