On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 9:01 PM, Jim Riggs apache-li...@riggs.me wrote:
I may go ahead and write up a patch this weekend to change them all (*Match
and RewriteRule) and then we can all debate it over on bugz too!
ap_getparents() may be the right place to strip
(non-leading-)double-slashes
but not
the request URL //abc. Based on all of my tests, the leading slash *is*
collapsed in the *Match and RewriteRule directives. Subsequent slashes
after the first are not.
It's probably too old.
So, it is documented, but is there a compelling use case for this? When
would someone actually
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 6:01 AM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 9:01 PM, Jim Riggs apache-li...@riggs.me wrote:
I may go ahead and write up a patch this weekend to change them all
(*Match and RewriteRule) and then we can all debate it over on bugz too
(*Match and RewriteRule) and then we can all debate it over on bugz too!
ap_getparents() may be the right place to strip
(non-leading-)double-slashes, for any code using r-uri to be fixed.
None of this thread mentions /client/provided/./url, another issue.
Precisely ap_getparents() strips all
*is* collapsed
in the *Match and RewriteRule directives. Subsequent slashes after the first
are not.
So, it is documented, but is there a compelling use case for this? When would
someone actually need to match against the multiple slashes (unless it's some
really strange hack someone has implemented
On Thu, 30 Apr 2015, Yann Ylavic wrote:
On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Jim Riggs apache-li...@riggs.me wrote:
Thanks, Yann. I remember looking at this code before. The question remains, though: Is it
currently wrong?
Does it need to be fixed, or was this distinction made intentionally?
Is
* Niklas Edmundsson wrote:
On Thu, 30 Apr 2015, Yann Ylavic wrote:
On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Jim Riggs apache-li...@riggs.me
wrote:
Thanks, Yann. I remember looking at this code before. The question
remains, though: Is it currently wrong? Does it need to be fixed,
or was this
On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Jim Riggs apache-li...@riggs.me wrote:
Thanks, Yann. I remember looking at this code before. The question remains,
though: Is it currently wrong?
Does it need to be fixed, or was this distinction made intentionally?
Is there a specific use case that requires
, |
| | Directive: | RewriteRule: | RewriteRule: |
| | /slash/foo | ^/slash/foo | ^/slash/+foo |
+---+--+--+--+
| /slash/foo| Match| Match| Match
+1
By unbreaking configurations we are indeed changing behavior. This could
be an unexpected change for an admin during a minor upgrade but I weigh
that against the fact that directives enclosed by these matches may be
intended to add security/authorization/authentication which a badly
written
passed to regex-matching
directives, or is there a specific reason that is not done?
+---+--+--+--+
| Path | Non-Regex |*Match, |*Match, |
| | Directive: | RewriteRule: | RewriteRule
* Jim Riggs wrote:
This came up at ApacheCon a couple of weeks ago. I just took this knowledge
for granted, as I have always accounted for it, but both Rich and Trawick
were surprised. As I thought about it some more, it seems this may be a
POLA violation. Thoughts? If we agree it should be
, or is
there a specific reason that is not done?
+---+--+--+--+
| Path | Non-Regex |*Match, |*Match, |
| | Directive: | RewriteRule: | RewriteRule: |
| | /slash/foo | ^/slash/foo | ^/slash
Hello,
I want to log client certificate chain, when there is ssl verification failure.
So I have a rule
RewriteCond %{SSL:SSL_CLIENT_VERIFY} !=SUCCESS
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ /cgi-bin/printenv.pl [QSA,PT,L]
But it doesn’t work. If change the rule to success, it works, but I need to log
the chain
Helo,
when handling a RewriteRule with the [P] flag, mod_rewrite always call
fully_qualify_uri() on the rewritten URL before returning.
This does nothing if the URL is already absolute, otherwise this will
result in :
ap_http_scheme(r)://ap_get_server_name_for_url(r):ap_get_server_port(r)/non
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
Helo,
when handling a RewriteRule with the [P] flag, mod_rewrite always call
fully_qualify_uri() on the rewritten URL before returning.
This does nothing if the URL is already absolute, otherwise this will result
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 5:54 PM, Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com
wrote:
Helo,
when handling a RewriteRule with the [P] flag, mod_rewrite always call
fully_qualify_uri() on the rewritten URL before returning
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 5:54 PM, Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com
wrote:
Helo,
when handling a RewriteRule with the [P] flag, mod_rewrite
be RewriteRule not RewriteMap in my previous mail. I
simplified the config to a single RewriteRule but forgot to adjst
subject and intro of my mail. The problem remains the same.
Doesn't that ring a bell - namely the one of PR 52774?
Thanks Kaspar, yes that's the same issue. Sorry
On 23.03.2012 18:11, Rainer Jung wrote:
It should be RewriteRule not RewriteMap in my previous mail. I
simplified the config to a single RewriteRule but forgot to adjst
subject and intro of my mail. The problem remains the same.
Doesn't that ring a bell - namely the one of PR 52774?
Kaspar
On 24.03.2012 07:02, Kaspar Brand wrote:
On 23.03.2012 18:11, Rainer Jung wrote:
It should be RewriteRule not RewriteMap in my previous mail. I
simplified the config to a single RewriteRule but forgot to adjst
subject and intro of my mail. The problem remains the same.
Doesn't that ring
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 7:31 AM, Rainer Jung rainer.j...@kippdata.de wrote:
On 24.03.2012 07:02, Kaspar Brand wrote:
On 23.03.2012 18:11, Rainer Jung wrote:
It should be RewriteRule not RewriteMap in my previous mail. I
simplified the config to a single RewriteRule but forgot to adjst
On 24.03.2012 16:39, Jeff Trawick wrote:
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 7:31 AM, Rainer Jungrainer.j...@kippdata.de wrote:
On 24.03.2012 07:02, Kaspar Brand wrote:
On 23.03.2012 18:11, Rainer Jung wrote:
It should be RewriteRule not RewriteMap in my previous mail. I
simplified the config
It should be RewriteRule not RewriteMap in my previous mail. I
simplified the config to a single RewriteRule but forgot to adjst
subject and intro of my mail. The problem remains the same.
On 23.03.2012 18:00, Rainer Jung wrote:
It seems using a rewrite map in a forward proxy is broken
On Jan 4, 2012, at 9:25 PM, Eric Covener wrote:
Is keeping the generic worker reusable important?
If possible, then yeah. But if adds a lot of complexity to the
code, or reduces the efficiency of the named workers, then
I'd punt it for now...
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Rüdiger Plüm r.pl...@gmx.de wrote:
Eric Covener wrote:
The different handling of conn-port and conn-hostname doesn't look
right to me. Can the r-proxyreq check actually be false at this point or is
it simply redundant? And shouldn't the
Eric Covener wrote:
The different handling of conn-port and conn-hostname doesn't look
right to me. Can the r-proxyreq check actually be false at this point or is
it simply redundant? And shouldn't the strcasecmp(conn-hostname,
uri-hostname) check be done regardless of
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Rüdiger Plüm r.pl...@gmx.de wrote:
Eric Covener wrote:
The different handling of conn-port and conn-hostname doesn't look
right to me. Can the r-proxyreq check actually be false at this point or is
it simply redundant? And shouldn't the
-cp-addr;
+}
}
/* Close a possible existing socket if we are told to do so */
if (conn-close) {
virtualhost *:80
RewriteEngine on
RewriteRule ^/a http://localhost:81/a [P]
RewriteRule ^/b http://localhost:82/b [P]
/virtualhost
virtualhost *:81
AliasMatch ^/a$ /home
The different handling of conn-port and conn-hostname doesn't look
right to me. Can the r-proxyreq check actually be false at this point or is
it simply redundant? And shouldn't the strcasecmp(conn-hostname,
uri-hostname) check be done regardless of r-connection-keepalives?
I did not
On Wednesday 16 November 2011, Steffen wrote:
What I noticed, it is connecting to a port by a formerly used
proxied connection (port 7080 instead of 81);
Summary log:
[proxy:debug] [pid 8680:tid 2668] proxy_util.c(2140): proxy: HTTP:
has acquired connection for (*)
[proxy:debug] [pid
-proxy_toggle_ports.diff
virtualhost *:80
RewriteEngine on
RewriteRule ^/a http://localhost:81/a [P]
RewriteRule ^/b http://localhost:82/b [P]
/virtualhost
virtualhost *:81
AliasMatch ^/a$ /home/covener/SRC/httpd-trunk/built/icons/a.gif
/virtualhost
virtualhost *:82
AliasMatch ^/b$ /home
Stefan Fritsch wrote:
On Wednesday 16 November 2011, Steffen wrote:
What I noticed, it is connecting to a port by a formerly used
proxied connection (port 7080 instead of 81);
Summary log:
[proxy:debug] [pid 8680:tid 2668] proxy_util.c(2140): proxy: HTTP:
has acquired connection for
: Re: 2.3.15 RewriteRule P
Hi Steffen,
On Mon, 14 Nov 2011, Steffen wrote:
The issue below seems not to be related to SSL.
Tested in different non-SSL configs with eg.
RewriteRule /sysadmin(.*) http://%{HTTP_HOST}:81/sysadmin$1 [P,L]
And different servers as the back, Sambar, Surge, DManager
Hi Steffen,
On Mon, 14 Nov 2011, Steffen wrote:
The issue below seems not to be related to SSL.
Tested in different non-SSL configs with eg.
RewriteRule /sysadmin(.*) http://%{HTTP_HOST}:81/sysadmin$1 [P,L]
And different servers as the back, Sambar, Surge, DManager and Apache.
Sometimes
Am I correct in assuming this is just under Windows...??
On Nov 14, 2011, at 1:31 PM, Steffen wrote:
The issue below seems not to be related to SSL.
Tested in different non-SSL configs with eg.
RewriteRule /sysadmin(.*) http://%{HTTP_HOST}:81/sysadmin$1 [P,L]
And different servers
On Monday 14 November 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 11/14/2011 12:31 PM, Steffen wrote:
The issue below seems not to be related to SSL.
Tested in different non-SSL configs with eg.
RewriteRule /sysadmin(.*) http://%{HTTP_HOST}:81/sysadmin$1 [P,L]
And different servers
The issue below seems not to be related to SSL.
Tested in different non-SSL configs with eg.
RewriteRule /sysadmin(.*) http://%{HTTP_HOST}:81/sysadmin$1 [P,L]
And different servers as the back, Sambar, Surge, DManager and Apache.
Sometimes it works but mostly it is not passing (good) URL info
The issue below seems not to be related to SSL.
Tested in different non-SSL configs with eg.
RewriteRule /sysadmin(.*) http://%{HTTP_HOST}:81/sysadmin$1 [P,L]
And different servers as the back, Sambar, Surge, DManager and Apache.
Sometimes it works but mostly it is not passing (good) URL info
On 11/14/2011 12:31 PM, Steffen wrote:
The issue below seems not to be related to SSL.
Tested in different non-SSL configs with eg.
RewriteRule /sysadmin(.*) http://%{HTTP_HOST}:81/sysadmin$1 [P,L]
And different servers as the back, Sambar, Surge, DManager and Apache.
Sometimes it works
/test.dll). In my case adding / is not
working because now test.dll part is meant as a directory instead of a file
test.dll inside test directory (my IIS server thinks so).
After that I tried to use RewriteRule. For example:
RewriteRule /test1/test2/ http://another_server/test/test.dll. This time
in context:
http://old.nabble.com/RewriteRule-question-tp32332668p32332668.html
Oh, right, a website that appropriates our list and misleads (some) users.
Sent from the Apache HTTP Server - Module Writers mailing list archive at
Nabble.com.
But that looks clear enough to me. Is the website so two
On 25 Aug 2011, at 11:04, Denys wrote:
Do you mean, Nick, that I have submitted the question to the wrong branch?
branch? What's a branch? This is a mailing list for module developers!
Sorry, my reply was OTT. I just get a bit cross at some of the stuff that gets
misdirected from
On 25 Aug 2011, at 11:04, Denys wrote:
Do you mean, Nick, that I have submitted the question to the wrong branch?
branch? What's a branch? This is a mailing list for module developers!
Sorry, my reply was OTT. I just get a bit cross at some of the stuff that gets
misdirected from
On Monday 02 May 2011, Eric Covener wrote:
On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 10:40 PM, Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com
wrote:
- Create new directives RewriteToPath, RewriteToURL that don't
do guessing. - Document clearly the problems that may be caused
by the guessing behaviour of RewriteRule. Maybe
On May 2, 2011, at 12:04 AM, Eric Covener wrote:
I took a pass at the doc to make the stuff we're discussing a bit more
explicit which might help the discussion/deprecation too.
http://people.apache.org/~covener/patches/rewrite-substitution_clarity.diff
+1 to changes.
--
Rich Bowen
- Create new directives RewriteToPath, RewriteToURL that don't do guessing.
- Document clearly the problems that may be caused by the guessing
behaviour of RewriteRule. Maybe even mark RewriteRule as deprecated in
2.4.
another one on users@, +1 to this approach and strong advice
On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 10:40 PM, Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com wrote:
- Create new directives RewriteToPath, RewriteToURL that don't do guessing.
- Document clearly the problems that may be caused by the guessing
behaviour of RewriteRule. Maybe even mark RewriteRule as deprecated in
2.4
by the
guessing behaviour of RewriteRule. Maybe even mark RewriteRule as
deprecated in 2.4.
Why not flags to RewriteRule? like
RewriteRule ... /$1 [abs]
(or [rel]).
For compat reasons I'd keep the current behaviour without such a flag.
nd
--
Das Verhalten von Gates hatte mir bewiesen, dass ich auf
Hi,
a client used
RewriteRule ^/some/old/path/(.*)$ /$1
in his httpd config, in order to redirect some paths that are now
available directly under the document root. This has the problem that
mod_rewrite guesses if the substituted path is an URL or an absoulte local
path by looking at the first
-Original Message-
From: Stefan Fritsch
Sent: Freitag, 15. April 2011 11:08
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: RewriteRule ... /$1 considered harmful
Hi,
a client used
RewriteRule ^/some/old/path/(.*)$ /$1
in his httpd config, in order to redirect some paths
On Fri, April 15, 2011 11:34, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
RewriteRule ^/some/old/path/(.*)$ /$1
in his httpd config, in order to redirect some paths that are now
available directly under the document root. This has the problem that
mod_rewrite guesses if the substituted path is an URL
Hi, i am using apache http server to rewrite and i have defined few rules. I
have a problem during this rewriterules, the actual headers are lost. Is it
possible to send the headers along with the request.
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Apache-RewriteRule-blocks-sending
Hi,
RewriteRule does tilde expansion even without mod_userdir being
loaded, and it does so without the usual public_html component being
added. This is a) not mod_rewrite's business and b) a practically
unknown feature. I'd like to see this feature removed.
There's also an issue
on .htaccess about RewriteRule and I thought of adding
somethg like that :
RewriteRule (.*)\.(.*)$ substitution
Is my pattern right ? and also what can I put instead of substitution ?
Thanks a lot for your further reply.
ps: and sorry for my bad english :)
--
View this message in context:
http
Great thanks anyway
Joe Lewis-2 wrote:
Uh, the main website would show some definitive examples that you could
use. Since apparently google didn't accept your apache rewriterule
query, I have a result :
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.0/mod/mod_rewrite.html
(and yes, the periods
Hello,
I'm a newbie apache coder, so I apologize in advance for any mistake or
oversight :-)
I've coded this small patch to avoid the ugly hack of having to write
rules such as
RewriteRule .* /index.cgi?
to tell mod_rewrite forget the QS and thus provide greater consistency
in the flags API
We're just trying out mod_proxy_balancer now and have come across
some shortcomings or bugs. It doesn't seem like we can pass any of
the Proxy parameters to RewriteRule, e.g.,
RewriteRule ^/mbp/(.*) balancer://ourcluster/$1 [P] timeout=20
nofailover=On stickysession=OUR_COOKIE
doesn't
Bjørn Stabell wrote:
RewriteRule ^/mbp/(.*) balancer://ourcluster/$1 [P] timeout=20
nofailover=On stickysession=OUR_COOKIE
those (proxy) arguments are not part of the RewriteRule
directive/mod_rewrite.
Try to use
RewriteRule ^/mbp/(.*) balancer://ourcluster/$1 [P]
Proxy balancer
for RewriteRule [P] flag which is broken in HEAD
due to mod_proxy changes.
Revision ChangesPath
1.11 +9 -1 httpd-test/perl-framework/t/modules/rewrite.t
Index: rewrite.t
===
RCS file: /home/cvs/httpd
-framework/t/conf extra.conf.in
jorton 2004/10/12 06:53:41
Modified:perl-framework/t/modules rewrite.t
perl-framework/t/conf extra.conf.in
Log:
Add test for RewriteRule [P] flag which is broken in HEAD
due to mod_proxy changes.
Revision ChangesPath
1.11 +9
61 matches
Mail list logo
