Hi KP at 26.07.2011 20:45, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote: > Hi Erich; > > Am Montag, 25. Juli 2011, 16:13:08 schrieb Erich Titl: >> KP >> >> at 25.07.2011 10:12, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote: >>> Hi Erich; >>> >>> Am Sonntag, 24. Juli 2011, 23:03:23 schrieb Erich Titl: >>>> HI KP >>>> ...
>>> >>> Updated webconf.lrp and get an error >>> >>> haserl CGI Error >>> Unknown operation near line 85 of lrcfg.cgi >>> >>> >>> >>> at a lot of places (e.g. every time I call a config file in "expert >>> mode"). The same with "Backup Settings", "DSL Settings" and >>> "Dropbear.ssh". >> >> Sounds like there is old syntax in the .cgi files. This does not happen >> at my site. The reason being that I am using haserl 0.9 for quite some >> years now. >> ... >> >> Having the .cgi files in a tarball (as in webconf and lwp) makes it >> difficult to find out the differences, also possible enhancements which >> partially are commented poorly. >> >> To make it easier for future enhancement I will explode the webconf >> tarball in my local experimental branch and introduce single files. > > You're right and I did the same for lwp package; fixed also config.cgi, > pppoe.cgi and dropbear.cgi. Mhhhh... I have not seen that yet. Did you commit to master? > >> This >> will not enhance the capability to compare files between the branches >> though. We need to find a solution for this in the long run. > > There should be one, it's not on unusual task IMHO. Right, I just cannot find the right syntax and git documentation is big but sucks. > >> I can also look at the current lwp files, they should be pretty easy to >> fix, just tedious to find the problems without being able to compare. >> >> The easiest way to get quick results is to report single findings here. >> I have not been able to find a ticket for it. > > See tickets #58 and #60. > > You asked for it :) I did... just looked at #58, no description of the error though. I will look at the line you mentioned in lrcfg.cgi. Concerning #60 this does IMHO not belong to the webconf package, as long as we have dnscache. I for once do not use dnsmasq, but dnscache and would not want to clutter my web interface with stuff I don't install. That is the main reason why I would like to see the .cgi files merged into the .lrp packages. This way we could avoid things like that at a very low overhead. cheers Erich
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Got Input? Slashdot Needs You. Take our quick survey online. Come on, we don't ask for help often. Plus, you'll get a chance to win $100 to spend on ThinkGeek. http://p.sf.net/sfu/slashdot-survey
_______________________________________________ leaf-devel mailing list leaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
