severity 397886 important
(breaks something both valid and common, and that used to work)
Steinar H. Gunderson a écrit :
Now, what you are probably thinking of is the following abomination:
head
meta http-equiv=Content-type content=text/html; charset=iso-8859-15
/head
This
On Fri, Dec 22, 2006 at 06:42:46PM +0100, Daniel Déchelotte wrote:
But setting such a DefaultCharset *breaks* *working* pages (and
perfectly valid ones) for very little benefit. Sites that use latin
encoding for latin characters are *not* broken.
Discussions about best behavior aside, just to
Steinar H. Gunderson a écrit :
On Fri, Dec 22, 2006 at 06:42:46PM +0100, Daniel Déchelotte wrote:
But setting such a DefaultCharset *breaks* *working* pages (and
perfectly valid ones) for very little benefit. Sites that use latin
encoding for latin characters are *not* broken.
On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at 05:52:32PM +0100, Steinar H.
Gunderson wrote:
Anyhow, looking at the changelog, this option is
supposed only to be enabled
for new installations, and the logic in the postinst
seems correct. Are you
really upgrading, or is this a new
Package: apache2.2-common
Version: 2.2.3-3
Severity: important
*** Please type your report below this line ***
In apache2.2-common somebody choose to set up default charset:
apache2.2-common.postinst:45:
if [ ! -f /etc/apache2/conf.d/charset ]; then
echo AddDefaultCharset UTF-8
severity 397886 serious
thanks
Hi,
* Michel Briand ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [061110 01:34]:
This will modify apache configuration during an upgrade. Eventually will
cause all sites served locally to be IMPACTED by wrong charsets [mozilla
selects utf8 if apache told him that its the default - even
On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at 10:36:10AM +0100, Michel Briand wrote:
mozilla selects utf8 if apache told him that its the default - even if the
page designer used the content=text/html; charset=ISO-8859-15 in headers
Well.
AddDefaultCharset simply sets the default character set when the page does
On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at 05:47:45PM +0100, Michel Briand wrote:
I globally agree with you but why one would want to break a working
environment ?
What's to say it's working? It breaks in one specific use case for you; don't
assume it's worse for everybody else too.
We don't have necessary the
I globally agree with you but why one would want to break a working
environment ?
We don't have necessary the time to adapt all web site on the planet to
the new implementations.
I don't say that this implementation is not good, that's probably the
best way to manage new contents as utf8 is
I assume my point of view. I think I'm not alone.
I'm upgrading, but maybe there is a problem in the correct sense upgrade
was meant by dpkg at this very moment:
2006-11-09 16:47:08 install apache2.2-common none 2.2.3-3
because :
2006-11-09 16:47:01 status installed apache2-common 2.0.55-4.1
On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at 05:52:32PM +0100, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
Anyhow, looking at the changelog, this option is supposed only to be enabled
for new installations, and the logic in the postinst seems correct. Are you
really upgrading, or is this a new installation?
It's a new install of
11 matches
Mail list logo
