Re: [suggestion] ShebangAlias directive - to keep to make CGI scripts more portable

2002-05-29 Thread Webmaster33
I'm glad you like the idea. I hope it will be implemented as soon as possible. Best regards, Webmaster33 *** REPLY SEPARATOR *** On 2002.05.28 at 09:27 Bill Stoddard wrote: >I am +1 in concept on this. If I don't hear any strenuous objections, >I'll update the >STATUS file wit

Re: [suggestion] ShebangAlias directive - to keep to make CGI scripts more portable

2002-05-28 Thread Bill Stoddard
I am +1 in concept on this. If I don't hear any strenuous objections, I'll update the STATUS file with the suggestion. Bill > Yep, I know about the ScriptInterpreterSource directive. > > You may know, there are many problems for newbie users, > who usually don't know how to solve to have their P

Re: [suggestion] ShebangAlias directive - to keep to make CGI scripts more portable

2002-05-27 Thread Webmaster33
Yep, I know about the ScriptInterpreterSource directive. You may know, there are many problems for newbie users, who usually don't know how to solve to have their Perl scripts being portable, executabe also on Unix & Windows boxes, without the need of altering the shebang line. The suggested She

Re: [suggestion] ShebangAlias directive - to keep to make CGI scripts more portable

2002-05-27 Thread Bill Stoddard
Checkout the ScriptInterpreterSource directive. It is not quite as flexible as your suggestion but it may solve the problem. Bill - Original Message - From: "Webmaster33" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2002 8:03 AM Subject: [suggestion] ShebangAlias dir