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

Re: Error in package search CGI scripts.



On Thu, Nov 15, 2001 at 10:01:46AM +0000, Steve Kemp wrote:
>   Just a quick mail to report an error in the package search script.
>   [Some of these URL's may have wrapped badly, I apologise in advance
>  if this is the case].
> 
>   I started at:
> 
> 	http://www.debian.org/distrib/packages
> 
>    Filled in the form for "Search Package Directories", by typing
>  "kernel", and clicking search.
> 
>   This gave me 20 hits, at the following URL:
> 
> 
> http://packages.debian.org/cgi-bin/search_packages.pl?keywords=kernel&searchon=names&subword=1&version=stable&release=all
> 
>   At the bottom of the page I see :
> 
> 	"Responses 1-20 shown, out of total of 32"
> 
>   The URL that is then given is wrong, it is:
> 
> 
> http://packages.debian.org/cgi-bin/search_packages?keywords=kernel&searchon=names&version=stable&release=all&start=21&subword=1
> 
>   Notice how the "search_packages" script which is called is
>  missing the ".pl" extension?
>   I manually added .pl, and was taken to the correct 12
>  results.

Could someone in the debwww group please apply the following
patch?

--- search_packages.pl.orig	Thu Nov 15 08:27:59 2001
+++ search_packages.pl	Thu Nov 15 08:28:10 2001
@@ -247,7 +247,7 @@
 if last < count:
 	start = start + max_show
 	remain = count - last
-	print '<a href="http://packages.debian.org/cgi-bin/search_packages?keywords=' + encodedkeywords + '&searchon=' + searchon + '&version=' + version + '&release=' + release + '&start=' + str(start) + '&subword=' + str(subword) + '">'
+	print '<a href="http://packages.debian.org/cgi-bin/search_packages.pl?keywords=' + encodedkeywords + '&searchon=' + searchon + '&version=' + version + '&release=' + release + '&start=' + str(start) + '&subword=' + str(subword) + '">'
 	if remain <= max_show and remain == 1:
 		print "Show the last response.</a>\n"
 	elif remain <= max_show:

>   I hope this is helpful to you..

Very much so, thanks.

Matt



Reply to: