[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: apacheconfig patch review requested

On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 01:35:19PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 05:27:44PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > 
> > Hi.  Anyone know perl?  :-)
> > 
> > Bug #12094 (apache's oldest still-open bug!), #59998, #105820 and now
> > #129372 would seem to all be fixable by the patch attached to #105820.
> > Thanks to Steve Stock for supplying the patch.  Since I don't grok perl,
> > I'd just like someone to review it and see if it looks reasonable.
> > If it is, I'll incorporate it in apache 1.3.22-6.
> Well, the two BUG comments upset me a bit.  The latter at least is a
> problem.  It should be possible to solve both fairly easily - the
> former with a hash table (preferably hashing on inode/dev rather than
> filename) and the latter by prepending /etc/apache to relative paths. 
> I'm fairly certain Apache does nothing more complicated than that.

The inode hash is a good idea, looks to be a simple addition.  Any
thoughts on using a $main::something style variable name?  These appear
in other parts of the program, but it seems a bit too much like bad
style to me.

Relative paths are based off the ServerRoot setting.  By default this
is set in httpd.conf to /etc/apache, however it may also be set on the
command line and removed from httpd.conf.  Because I don't know how
flexible apacheconfig needs to be with respect to local configuration
changes I left this functionality out and labeled it a bug.  If it is
safe to assume that ServerRoot will always be set in httpd.conf then
fixing relative includes is easy enough.

Steve Stock

Reply to: