rcpt-dev.AT.httpd.apache.org at jankratochvil
Oct 27, 2004, 2:11 AM
Post #2 of 5
(946 views)
Permalink
|
Hi,
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 14:13:08 +0200, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> There is currently one showstopper holding up release of 1.3.33.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14518
> It has 2 votes for and none against, and it's for backing out
> a patch recently applied in mod_rewrite...
The patch during testing appears to me as inappropriate for 1.3.x; backout
is IMO appropriate.
The patch was right for 2.0.x (hopefully the backport to 1.3.x is not mine...).
Still it is just a test by heuristics as I cannot check the code itself.
I am clueless what is the expected value of URI-parsing fields of
"struct request_rec":
unparsed_uri, uri, filename, canonical_filename, path_info, args, parsed_uri.
All these items I consider undocumented - both in 1.3 and in 2.1 trees
(comments in 2.1 are still very ambiguous - URI examples would be perfect).
Unfortunately this behavior is pretty hot for modules compatibility.
What about cleaning it out before 2.2?
Signature of proxy_http_canon() looks broken to me:
* Its "url" argument type is undocumented as in the cases above.
* Argument "url" relation to "r" is also undocumented.
* The function modified its "url" argument content - IMO a bit unusual.
* The 'r->uri == r->unparsed_uri' code path condition looks unclear to me,
there should be at least macro for such condition defined around
"struct request_rec".
I would not say anything regarding undocumented URL code/structures if these
URL parsing issues would be handled fine by the code aware httpd coders;
unfortunately they look to have the same problems as httpd newbie like me.
Regards,
Lace
|
