www-apache-bugdb mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alan Flavell <a.flav...@physics.gla.ac.uk>
Subject documentation/6610: XBitHack full - useful functionality on win32 but no documentation
Date Sat, 30 Sep 2000 14:19:06 GMT

>Number:         6610
>Category:       documentation
>Synopsis:       XBitHack full - useful functionality on win32 but no documentation
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       non-critical
>Priority:       medium
>Responsible:    apache
>State:          open
>Quarter:        
>Keywords:       
>Date-Required:
>Class:          doc-bug
>Submitter-Id:   apache
>Arrival-Date:   Sat Sep 30 07:20:00 PDT 2000
>Closed-Date:
>Last-Modified:
>Originator:     a.flavell@physics.gla.ac.uk
>Release:        win32 1.3.12, 2.0a6, etc.
>Organization:
apache
>Environment:
win32 (appears also relevant to OS/2)
>Description:
I made some effort on comp.infosystems.www.servers.ms-windows to find
out what support, if any, win32 apache had for setting last-modified
a la XBitHack full; but without success.  Later in a different context
it was pointed out to me by Bjoern Hoehrmann that setting "XBitHack full"
had the consequence of setting Last-modified (i.e just as if the g+x bit
was set in unix).  (The fact that the file is an SSI at all has to be 
specified by other means, such as AddHandler - this is not the issue.)

But he said that although this was obvious from the source, there did 
not seem to be any documentation.

I tried the above and I confirm that it works, and this can be seen in the
the code (for Win32 and for OS2).

Looking again more closely in the bugs database, I then found 5795 which 
appears to be an extra directive "LastModHack" for this purpose.  But again 
there seems to be no documentation, and on the basis of Bjoern's observations
it is not clear that the code patch in 5795 is really needed.

I would like to be able to recommend to Win32 users some way in which 
last-modified can optionally be set for SSI.  I would like to have some
confidence that the method I am recommending is not just some accident of
the code, which might later change without notice.  Therefore I am asking if
the present behaviour of XBitHack full in Win32 (and apparently also OS/2) 
can be documented for this purpose, and thus maintained into future releases.
(Or some alternative solution documented and supported.)

>How-To-Repeat:
n/a
>Fix:
Advertise the feature in the documentation, preferably; and/or an FAQ.

>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
>Unformatted:
 [In order for any reply to be added to the PR database, you need]
 [to include <apbugs@Apache.Org> in the Cc line and make sure the]
 [subject line starts with the report component and number, with ]
 [or without any 'Re:' prefixes (such as "general/1098:" or      ]
 ["Re: general/1098:").  If the subject doesn't match this       ]
 [pattern, your message will be misfiled and ignored.  The       ]
 ["apbugs" address is not added to the Cc line of messages from  ]
 [the database automatically because of the potential for mail   ]
 [loops.  If you do not include this Cc, your reply may be ig-   ]
 [nored unless you are responding to an explicit request from a  ]
 [developer.  Reply only with text; DO NOT SEND ATTACHMENTS!     ]
 
 


Mime
View raw message