httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ralf S. Engelschall" <>
Subject Re: NCSA httpd
Date Sun, 01 Sep 1996 10:47:47 GMT
On 1 Sep 1996 03:17:42 +0200 in en.lists.apache-new-httpd you wrote:

> * NCSA supplements the Redirect directive with the
>   RedirectTemp and RedirectPermanent directives, to allow for 301
>   redirects as well as 302. This is very simple to do.

That would be a useful feature. How will it be implemented for the modules
like mod_rewrite? Could it then return REDIRECT_TEMP or REDIRECT_PERM
additionally to REDIRECT? Or have it to set the HTTP result status itself?
Returning new values would be nice.

> [...]
> * Satisfy. There are enough patches floating around - can't we just
>   commit one already? (one that works, hopefully)

Recently there was a good-looking patch in c.i.w.s.u! I didn't grab it but
when you search through a archive of this newsgroup you can find it. Totally
there are three patches out there in the world, I think.

> * NCSA supports CERN imagemap format as well as NCSA. Do we? (I
>   forget. We should.)

I checked the current mod_imap.c and it seems not to be able to parse the
CERN format. CERN mapfiles have "(x,y)" instead of "x,y" and the URL strings
are not always the second argument in a line as with NCSA mapfiles. So, the
current mod_imap is not capable of reading CERN mapfiles.

> [...]
> * Redirect doesn't require a full URL - if you omit the server name,
>   it will redirect to the local server.

mod_rewrite's redirect flag [R] still supports this.
mod_alias's Redirect directive does not.

> [...]
> * Built-in FastCGI support. This would be trivial; just grab mod_fastcgi,
>   and add it to the distribution (they even include a mod_fastcgi.html
>   in just the right format to add to our docs. Nice of 'em). Their
>   license even lets us do it without asking them first (though it
>   would probably be polite to). This might be a good idea (or not; the
>   thing's 97k, even larger than mod_rewrite and mod_proxy), FastCGI
>   seems pretty nice and well-designed (even if half of their web site is
>   an ad for their web server). Does anyone have any experience with
>   it?

Hmmm... the current mod_fastcgi.c v1.2 works with the Apache API of 1.1
because I ported it to this a few months ago and send back the diffs to the
author. The code seems ok, yes, but I'm not sure how bullet-proof this module
really is. Before inclusion one should check the current version under
runtime and also check again the current implementation. If both are ok, then
it should be included as another optional module.

                                        Ralf S. Engelschall    

View raw message