httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Hartill <hart...@ooo.lanl.gov>
Subject Re: hmmm...
Date Wed, 19 Apr 1995 18:07:48 GMT
 
> On Wed, 19 Apr 1995, Andrew Wilson wrote:
> > Erk.  Weeel, it looks like this is really not 1.3R compliant behaviour, so
> > does it pass the backward-compatibility test?  If no,  then we should
> > unpatch and make 0.6.2, or document it and put a support/apache2common
> > script somewhere.
> 

 Brian responded

> No, I think for now we should just not log the second response, the "real 
> object" that was returned.  For 401 access for example, I know that 
> 401.html will always be returned, so logging it is redundant.  

What about the other error/problem redirects, and regular redirects ?
should we not log those too ?

Is it also redundant to log
   /missing
when I know that   /missing/  is almost sure to follow a second
later ?


You seem to be saying there's too much information there. I'd
disagree. If some of the info isn't of interest to you, ignore it.


robh

Mime
View raw message