I still think that the below has value and should not be/have-been reverted.
Anyone opposed to me re-adding it to trunk and removing it from the backport proposal? > On Jun 29, 2017, at 1:43 PM, jchamp...@apache.org wrote: > > Modified: httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/mappers/mod_actions.c > URL: > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/mappers/mod_actions.c?rev=1800306&r1=1800305&r2=1800306&view=diff > ============================================================================== > --- httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/mappers/mod_actions.c (original) > +++ httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/mappers/mod_actions.c Thu Jun 29 17:43:48 2017 > @@ -186,8 +186,7 @@ static int action_handler(request_rec *r > ap_field_noparam(r->pool, r->content_type); > > if (action && (t = apr_table_get(conf->action_types, action))) { > - int virtual = (*t++ == '0' ? 0 : 1); > - if (!virtual && r->finfo.filetype == APR_NOFILE) { > + if (*t++ == '0' && r->finfo.filetype == APR_NOFILE) { > ap_log_rerror(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_INFO, 0, r, APLOGNO(00652) > "File does not exist: %s", r->filename); > return HTTP_NOT_FOUND; > @@ -198,9 +197,6 @@ static int action_handler(request_rec *r > * (will be REDIRECT_HANDLER there) > */ > apr_table_setn(r->subprocess_env, "HANDLER", action); > - if (virtual) { > - apr_table_setn(r->notes, "virtual_script", "1"); > - } > } > > if (script == NULL) >
