And, in briefly re-examing my reason for developing this module, here's
what happens when, on a stock freshly installed httpd-2.2.17-1.fc14.x86_64
FC-14 setup, I try to do :
in /etc/httpd/conf/httpd.conf :
@line 320:
#
# Possible values for the Options directive are "None", "All",
# or any
> I still don't see how else to overcome this problem with apache's SSI.
I think in general it is not perceived as a problem that fragments of
pages are directly accessible.
-
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache
> AddHandler ssi-fragment ".inc" ".ssi"
Another back might be to use mod_rewrite and ensure your fragments are
only accessible via subrequests.
--
Eric Covener
cove...@gmail.com
-
The official User-To-User support forum of th
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 12:05 PM, Jason Vas Dias
wrote:
> On Wednesday 06 April 2011 16:22:46 Eric Covener wrote:
>> > Yes, but even with "file" the server will still "serve" those files and
>> > they must still be "accessable"
>> > to HTTP/S requests -
>>
>> It will serve them (outside of SSI) if
On Wednesday 06 April 2011 16:22:46 Eric Covener wrote:
> > Yes, but even with "file" the server will still "serve" those files and
> > they must still be "accessable"
> > to HTTP/S requests -
>
> It will serve them (outside of SSI) if you configure it to, but I
> don't see it as a requirement as
> Yes, but even with "file" the server will still "serve" those files and they
> must still be "accessable"
> to HTTP/S requests -
It will serve them (outside of SSI) if you configure it to, but I
don't see it as a requirement as it is with virtual.
--
On Wednesday 06 April 2011 15:58:29 you wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Jason Vas Dias
> wrote:
> > I don't understand why this question got no responses .
> >
> > Surely it is not an unreasonable request to ask the server to support
> > SSI requests like :
> > \<\!\-\-\#include virtual
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Jason Vas Dias
wrote:
> I don't understand why this question got no responses .
>
> Surely it is not an unreasonable request to ask the server to support
> SSI requests like :
> \<\!\-\-\#include virtual\=\"include/head.html\"\-\-\>
> without also exporting "incl
I don't understand why this question got no responses .
Surely it is not an unreasonable request to ask the server to support
SSI requests like :
\<\!\-\-\#include virtual\=\"include/head.html\"\-\-\>
without also exporting "include/*" to be available to HTTP/S requests ?
Of what meaning to u
