* Eric Covener wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Graham Leggett <minf...@sharp.fm> wrote:
> > On 4 Oct 2012, at 17:32, Eric Covener <cove...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1032431&view=rev
> >>> Log:
> >>> mod_rewrite: Fix the RewriteEngine directive to work within a
> >>> location. Previously, once RewriteEngine was switched on globally,
> >>> it was impossible to switch off.
> >>>
> >>> + a->baseurl = (overrides->baseurl_set == 0) ? base->baseurl :
> >>> overrides->baseurl; + a->baseurl_set = overrides->baseurl_set ||
> >>> base->baseurl_set;
> >>
> >> PR https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53963 points out
> >> that mergeing the base is probably not very useful and actually harms
> >> configs where no rewritebase is required in some subdirs but present
> >> in parent dirs.
> >>
> >> Any issue with dropping this part of the change?
> >
> > Having an arbitrary inconsistent behaviour from a directive in a module
> > already noted for its complexity is a really bad thing. What we should
> > support instead is the ability to turn RewriteBase off if needed, with
> > something like "RewriteBase off".
>
> "Rewritebase off" to undo the copy of base URL from the parent to the
> subdir seems wrong. I'll try to merge in a value less likely to be
> wrong.
Hmm. The very sole concept of RewriteBase is "base for this location and
this location only". So merging is most certainly a nogo. It *will* break
stuff. mod_rewrite already has enough bad guessings built in ;)
nd
--
Da fällt mir ein, wieso gibt es eigentlich in Unicode kein
"i" mit einem Herzchen als Tüpfelchen? Das wär sooo süüss!
-- Björn Höhrmann in darw
