httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Trawick <traw...@attglobal.net>
Subject Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0/server request.c
Date Fri, 15 Mar 2002 14:52:06 GMT
"William A. Rowe, Jr." <wrowe@rowe-clan.net> writes:

>    I like this solution as well! [sorry, I've had little time on my hands,
> and no time to chime in on your earlier pleas for comment :-( ]

In all honesty I figured committing it was the best way to get your
feedback :)  Now I get to strike through the "close PR 10138 if nobody
complains" task on my white board.

>    There are two other cases; the pre-queried or quick-stat'ed
> r->finfo before we entered dir_walk's path parsing loop, and the
> the initial lstat() leg, which we don't hit with this patch.  [e.g.
> only an APR_LNK that is re-stat()'ed is caught in this leg
> of the code.]  Do we need extra tests on those two legs,
> as well?  E.g. subreq_lookup_file may already have stat()ed
> the file, or [per the group's request] we will try to stat() on
> entry and save ourselves the effort within the loop.

shrug for now...  I'll try to think about it.

>    I don't know that I would be opposed to catching this in
> apr_stat() as well.  Sure, apr_file_open would succeed in
> spite of the fact that apr_stat() fails, but the point to the
> apr_file and apr_filepath functions were to normalize many
> different OS'es into similar behavior.  You wouldn't need to
> actually stat() a file to reject from apr_open(), either.  Simply
> testing for a trailing slash would be sufficient.

I can buy that argument.  I'll put something in APR's STATUS file.

-- 
Jeff Trawick | trawick@attglobal.net
Born in Roswell... married an alien...

Mime
View raw message