On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 12:17:16 -0500
"Jeff Trawick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Nov 26, 2007 11:50 AM, Nick Kew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 10:38:28 -0500
> > "Jeff Trawick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > What is the intention for the UNHANDLED case? The code/comments
> > > seem to imply we'll end up in the "respect CL" path.
> >
> > Exactly.
>
> Cool; we're in sync so far, which brings us to my concern: We won't
> end up in the "respect CL" path ;)
Aha. Neither would we before, so no possible regression.
> Finding any Transfer-Encoding, supported or not, results in bypassing
> this support for CL:
>
> else if (lenp) {
> char *endstr;
>
> ctx->state = BODY_LENGTH;
> errno = 0;
Indeed. Fixing that seems to make sense, but it'll need the
backport vote to be reset.
--
Nick Kew
Application Development with Apache - the Apache Modules Book
http://www.apachetutor.org/
