On Sat, Aug 13, 2005 at 10:29:54AM +0200, Graham Leggett wrote: > The idea of canonicalising the name is sound, but munging them into an > added :80 and an added ? is really ugly - these are not the kind of URLs > that an end user would understand at a glance if they had to see them > listed.
An end-user should never see these keys, the only place they are visible to any user is the semi-binary mod_disk_cache files. An administrator would have to really know what they're doing to find them, or be using htcacheadmin - once I finish that, and if it gets accepted. > Is it possible to remove the :80 if the scheme is https, and remove the > :443 if the scheme is https:? What is the significance of the added "?"? The "?" isn't me, that's current mod_cache behaviour, so I left it alone. It doesn't have any significance except for avoiding an extra condition. r->args is part of the key aswell, it just happens to have been NULL in those examples. Either way, doing as you suggest is trivial, but is there really a point adding more conditions? Any tool which does inspect the cache files can clean it up for presentation to the administrator. -- Colm MacCárthaigh Public Key: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
