The actual merge occurs in ap_sub_req_method_uri(). Can you breakpoint and
determine what's passed? This sounds like a vhost's per-dir-config may not
be initialized.
I also (reviewing that code) didn't like what I saw...
udir = ap_make_dirstr_parent(rnew->pool, r->uri);
udir = ap_escape_uri(rnew->pool, udir); /* re-escape it */
ap_parse_uri(rnew, ap_make_full_path(rnew->pool, udir, new_file));
This means that the new_file is _never_ escaped!!!
The code below might fit -some- situations better...
udir = ap_make_dirstr_parent(rnew->pool, r->uri);
udir = ap_make_full_path(rnew->pool, udir, new_file);
udir = ap_escape_uri(rnew->pool, udir); /* re-escape it */
ap_parse_uri(rnew, udir);
I'd argue that we need -2- different functions, with a _u and _e suffix,
to differentiate if we are making a relative sub_req with an already
escaped or unescaped new_file.
I don't want to break anyone overnight, so I'd suggest we add the _u
function, and rename the _e function next week after everyone has a
chance to pipe in. I'm afraid that most module authors simply haven't
spent any time considering if their input to sub_req was already escaped,
or not.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Ames" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 10:00 AM
Subject: Re: autoindex instead of index.html
>
> Ryan Bloom wrote:
> >
> > On Tuesday 25 September 2001 03:32 pm, Greg Ames wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, that should fail. Why isn't that an absolute path?
>
> That's the bug. We're not mapping the subrequest URI into a path in
> this case. I don't know where it's supposed to happen any more -
> map_to_storage sounds promising though. I suppose I can see how it's
> done now when the original URI is for a file, and maybe see how 2.0.25
> does it for a directory containing index.html.
>
> Greg
>
