httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@lnd.com>
Subject RE: Windows Registry stuff in http_core.c
Date Sun, 25 Jun 2000 04:52:13 GMT
> From: dean gaudet [mailto:dgaudet-list-new-httpd@arctic.org]
> Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2000 11:16 AM
> To: new-httpd@apache.org
> Subject: Re: Windows Registry stuff in http_core.c
> 
> 
> i don't see why the shebang emulation isn't part of the 
> process code in
> APR.

Three classes of issues... one is shebang emulation, and I believe it
exists right now in APR (it existed in similar functions in 1.3.x).
If not it should, and I will.  But that isn't the vast majority of
code in question.

The second class is registry execution, which is quite different
from shebang emulation.  Pull a command from the registry based
on the file type.  Definately very -different- behavior than shebang.

Third class of issues is rule systems.  Default Apache behavior is
shebang emulation only.  So, it's concievable that -this- -part-
could go into APR as part of ap_create_process() or whatnot.  But
today we can override this with registry execution.  The 2.0 patch
I just submitted extends this further to say 'strictly choose the
registry' when executing scripts.  A simple flag to create process
could say, effectively, no shebang lookup, and we would be done.

I'll look into this very seriously in two weeks.  There is -lots-
of other minor nits and issues right now (as Bill admitted a few
months ago when he too couldn't run a batch file :)

Bill


> On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 rbb@covalent.net wrote:
> 
> > There are a couple of functions inside http_core.c that are VERY Windows
> > specific.  Namely, these get the interpreter source for CGI scripts.  Is
> > there a reason these can not be moved to the Windows MPM?  This would just
> > remove some code that isn't needed by any platform other than Windows.


Mime
View raw message