Thanks for the feedback. So "/path/*.something" will handle URI's like "/path/sub1/sub2/file.something" "/path/sub1/sub2/anotherfilename.something"
but "/path/*something" will NOT handle URI's like "/path/sub1/sub2/here_is_something" or "/path/moreofsomething" or "/path/sub1/sub2/sub3/something" So the asterisk can only be used in conjunction with a dot as in "*.something" as far as URI mapping is concerned? So the real wildcard sequence is actually "*." and "*xyz" is interpreted as "*"? Wouldn't it be better to make mod_jk deal with wildcards a little bit more intelligently, or am I missing something? (which is more likely) -Mike Jennings ----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry Isaacs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Tomcat Developers List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 10:42 AM Subject: RE: Does anyone see anything wrong with this fix? > I believe mod_jk's JkMount currently only accepts mappings in the > form: > > JkMount /path/* > JkMount /path/*.ext > > Something like: > > JkMount /path/*something > > is another way of saying: > > JkMount /path/* > > which makes the other settings written irrelevant since all > requests will be mapped to Tomcat. See the: > > /* context based */ > asterisk[1] = '\0'; > > in jk_uri_worker_map.c file. > > Tomcat 3.3 deals with this by having the generated mod_jk.conf > use the "JkMount /path/*" approach by default. If you add > forwardAll="false" to the ApacheConfig line in server.xml, > it will write a mod_jk.conf similar to that of Tomcat 3.2.x, > but with additional mappings. These additional mappings for > the context will include one like the following: > > JkMount /examples/jsp/security/login/j_security_check ajp13 > > If you want "j_security_check" to work in Tomcat 3.2.x without > mapping all requests to Tomcat, you will need to add mappings > like this. It is beyond the scope of Tomcat 3.2.x development > to back port Tomcat 3.3's behavior to Tomcat 3.2.x. > > Cheers, > Larry > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Michael Jennings [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:35 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Does anyone see anything wrong with this fix? > > > > > > As far as I can tell, the following modification to the > > ApacheConfig.java class will > > enable form-based authentication to work for people using > > mod_jk.conf-auto > > with Apache. > > > > > > mod_jk needs to be told to handle requests of the form > > "/webapproot/somedir/j_security_check" > > > > since a login.jsp page (for form-based authentication) may exist at > > "/webapproot/somedir/login.jsp" and may specify "j_security_check" > > as the target of a form submission. In order for the > > form-based authentication > > machinery to work, it needs to get the POST request that is going to > > "/webapproot/somedir/j_security_check" > > which means that pattern has to be present in the mod_jk.conf-auto > > > > ie: the following line must be in the mod_jk configuration file: > > JkMount /webapproot/*j_security_check ajp12 > > > > Does anyone see any potential problems with this? > > > > -Mike Jennings > > > > Index: > > jakarta-tomcat/src/share/org/apache/tomcat/task/ApacheConfig.java > > =================================================================== > > RCS file: > > /home/cvspublic/jakarta-tomcat/src/share/org/apache/tomcat/tas > > k/Attic/ApacheConfig.java,v > > retrieving revision 1.12.2.2 > > diff -r1.12.2.2 ApacheConfig.java > > 202a203 > > > mod_jk.println("JkMount /*j_security_check ajp12"); > > 289a291 > > > mod_jk.println("JkMount " + path +"/*j_security_check ajp12"); > > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
