Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 52841 invoked by uid 500); 23 Apr 2002 17:41:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 52826 invoked from network); 23 Apr 2002 17:41:08 -0000 From: "Sander Striker" To: Subject: RE: [PATCH] Use expanded path variables instead of @@ServerRoot@@ Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 19:48:10 +0200 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <20020423103558.B15450@apache.org> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 Importance: Normal X-Rcpt-To: X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N > From: Justin Erenkrantz [mailto:jerenkrantz@apache.org] > Sent: 23 April 2002 19:36 > This patch should fix PR 8227. > > http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8227 +1 on the patch. We shouldn't mess with path concatenation like we are doing currently; it's asking for trouble. > Is there any reason to use @@ServerRoot@@ (and the reason why > I'm posting instead of committing right away)? -- justin I don't see why we should use @@ServerRoot@@ for any of these cases. Sander