Joshua Slive wrote:
On Mon, 9 Feb 2004, Brian Akins wrote:
SetHandler virtual-dynamic-handler
Alias /normal/stuff/dyn /dynamic-stuff
How would all this affect this situation? IE, we would still need to
know that /normal/stuff/dyn/1/2/test.html became
/dynamic-stuff/1/2/test.html
Alia
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
At 02:11 PM 2/9/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Modules can do that today with some very trivial code...
I think I see a problem. No doubt it could be made to work with a simple tweak.
SetHandler in the location container sets the handler f
At 02:11 PM 2/9/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>>At 04:34 PM 2/6/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>>>Joshua Slive wrote:
>
And perhaps I'm going way off in left field here, but why should this be
user-configurable at all? Shouldn't the (for example) server-sta
* "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >The only issue in mod_rewrite could be the Type/Handler forcing which
> >occurs also in fixup, where is the right place for such things (to force
> >something).
>
> Don't they result in internal redirects? In that case there is nothing
> wro
At 01:37 PM 2/9/2004, André Malo wrote:
>* "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> You hit the nail on the head - Alias (and mod_rewrite) cause us the greatest
>> grief in fixing this set of issues. *IF* they all are parsed in the
>> translate name phase we are fine, since map_to_st
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
At 04:34 PM 2/6/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joshua Slive wrote:
And perhaps I'm going way off in left field here, but why should this be
user-configurable at all? Shouldn't the (for example) server-status
handler know itself that it is a virtual handler, and theref
* "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You hit the nail on the head - Alias (and mod_rewrite) cause us the greatest
> grief in fixing this set of issues. *IF* they all are parsed in the
> translate name phase we are fine, since map_to_storage is run after
> translate_name is done.
You hit the nail on the head - Alias (and mod_rewrite) cause us the greatest
grief in fixing this set of issues. *IF* they all are parsed in the translate name
phase we are fine, since map_to_storage is run after translate_name is done.
If they are not handled up front we have problems (some tran
On Mon, 9 Feb 2004, Brian Akins wrote:
>
> SetHandler virtual-dynamic-handler
>
>
> Alias /normal/stuff/dyn /dynamic-stuff
>
>
> How would all this affect this situation? IE, we would still need to
> know that /normal/stuff/dyn/1/2/test.html became
> /dynamic-stuff/1/2/test.html
Alias ma
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
At 04:34 PM 2/6/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
/* this info-handler won't deal with the filename
* so null the filename to ensure no file is served.
*/
r->filename = "";
\
What if you have something like:
SetHandler virtual-dynamic-handler
At 04:34 PM 2/6/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Joshua Slive wrote:
>>>I do, however, agree that doing a directory-walk on virtual resources is
>>>not nice. But my opinion is that "virtualness" is a property of the
>>>resource, and hence should be designated when selecting the resource.
>>>That is
Joshua Slive wrote:
I do, however, agree that doing a directory-walk on virtual resources is
not nice. But my opinion is that "virtualness" is a property of the
resource, and hence should be designated when selecting the resource.
That is why I suggested changing SetHandler rather than .
And per
Greg Marr wrote:
I'm only changing ... is unaffected.
Well, that's not entirely true. The is affected indirectly,
because it no longer applies. The behavior currently is: it applies to
everything it matches. This would change it to: it applies to
everything it matches unless it also mat
At 09:47 AM 2/6/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>>At 12:17 PM 2/5/2004, Joshua Slive wrote:
>>
I do, however, agree that doing a directory-walk on virtual resources is
not nice. But my opinion is that "virtualness" is a property of the
resource, and hence sh
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
At 12:17 PM 2/5/2004, Joshua Slive wrote:
I do, however, agree that doing a directory-walk on virtual resources is
not nice. But my opinion is that "virtualness" is a property of the
resource, and hence should be designated when selecting the resource.
That is why I s
At 12:17 PM 2/5/2004, Joshua Slive wrote:
>> I do, however, agree that doing a directory-walk on virtual resources is
>> not nice. But my opinion is that "virtualness" is a property of the
>> resource, and hence should be designated when selecting the resource.
>> That is why I suggested changing
At 09:22 AM 2/5/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>Effect/Issue 1:
>>Bypassing the filesystem canonicalization would be very bad on certain platforms
>>such as windows, depending on case sensitivity, etc. It would
>>also bypass *user configured* options such as avoiding symlinks.
>
>only for If t
At 10:43 AM 2/5/2004, Greg Marr wrote:
>At 10:22 AM 2/5/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>Thanks for the feedback, Will.
>>
>>William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>>>At 03:39 PM 2/4/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>
But then if I play devil's advocate, someone could see the new directive and turn
i
> I do, however, agree that doing a directory-walk on virtual resources is
> not nice. But my opinion is that "virtualness" is a property of the
> resource, and hence should be designated when selecting the resource.
> That is why I suggested changing SetHandler rather than .
And perhaps I'm goi
At 10:22 AM 2/5/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for the feedback, Will.
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
At 03:39 PM 2/4/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But then if I play devil's advocate, someone could see the new directive
and turn it on when it's not appropriate and cause Bad Things to
happ
I just want to add a couple notes here on what I see as user-expectations.
> > The problem is that you want to add layers of additional directives, which
> > would change the behavior of or ,
>
> only , in a way that IMO is consistent with the existing
> documentation, but not the existing code
Thanks for the feedback, Will.
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
At 03:39 PM 2/4/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But then if I play devil's advocate, someone could see the new directive and turn it on when it's not appropriate and cause Bad Things to happen. Mainly I'm looking for comments on whether t
> Let's do this in 2.1 by splitting out the file system,
> and if the filesystem module isn't handling a request, it won't be serving
> content but also won't be invoking the directory walk or stat-ing files.
this all sounds kinda interesting, and similar to the way auth has been set
up in 2.1 -
At 03:39 PM 2/4/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>But then if I play devil's advocate, someone could see the new directive and turn it
>on when it's not appropriate and cause Bad Things to happen. Mainly I'm looking for
>comments on whether this should be configurable or not.
Yes, I'm one who wil
24 matches
Mail list logo
