httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From (Joseph Bridgewater)
Subject RE: [PATCH] Win32 device files
Date Fri, 04 Dec 1998 19:58:22 GMT
I'm just wondering here - is it actually important to support 'Doze95?
That "os" was never designed to be a server anyway.

At 07:51 PM 12/4/98 +0000, Paul Sutton wrote:
>On Thu, 3 Dec 1998, Ken Parzygnat wrote:
>> > I think it
>> > would be better to find where the "." is being added, since that
>> > sounds like a bogus thing to do in any case.  The only one I can
>> > think of is where "./" is prefixed for relative URI processing,
>> > but that should be removed before any file operation.
>> > 
>> I dug up the following in http_request.c  I don't know that I agree
>> with the comment, but somebody must have seen something at one
>> time.  Does anyone remember?
>> #ifdef WIN32
>>     /* If the path is x:/, then convert it to x:/., coz that's what stat
>>      * needs to work properly
>>      */
>Umm, who knows? I've just tried it on NT 4 SP4 and stat works with or
>without a trailing . (or in fact, any number of trailing dots). (Small
>test program available on request, if anyone else wants to try on
>different systems).
>Part of the problem with supporting Windows is that there are lots of
>incompatibilities between different versions (95/NT), releases, service
>pack updates, MSIE versions, and all the other little packages and
>products which "upgrade" your "system" libraries (if Windows has such as
>concept). So this was probably true on some configuration somewhere, and
>it would be nice to find a list of all the differences between different
>versions of the standard DLL's somewhere (say on MS's site!) but I don't
>think there is one. 

View raw message