Thanks Igor and Eric for your help. :) However, I'm not convinced that's the cause here. Below is a bare minimum example that shows the weird behavior I started with...
On Fri, 2010-05-07 at 09:34 +1000, Igor Cicimov wrote: > Your 301 rule is wrong. As i said it should match the URI parth > meaning the part after the slash following the domain name and not the > whole URL. So no http:// in the rewrite rule hope this makes it more > clear. Yeah, you're referring to this early part of the RewriteRule docs, right? "Pattern is [...]. On the first RewriteRule it is applied to the URL-path of the request; subsequent patterns are applied to the output of the last matched RewriteRule." However, it is different with sub-sequent rules, and only those I use to match a protocol. (I just want to paranoidly ensure I'm not redirecting by accident. And the full code also supports more than 3xx only, by using special mappings.) So, here is a *minimal* stripped down example that demonstrates the weird behavior I'm asking about. RewriteRule ^/foo http://example.net/ RewriteRule ^http:// - [R=301,L] RewriteRule ^/bar http://example.org/ RewriteRule ^(http://.*)$ $1 [R=301,L] Now, "GET /foo HTTP/1.1" redirects to the rewritten URI as expected, but it ignores my explicit 301 return code and instead defaults to 302. HTTP/1.1 302 Found Location: http://example.net/ The second one, "GET /bar HTTP/1.1", does work exactly as I expected, as clearly shown in the result. Also, with the sub-sequent RewriteRules, it does match the full URI as substituted before (checked this with another debugging rule, appending a path). HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently Location: http://example.org/ The only difference I see -- as mentioned in my initial post -- is the explicit substitution as opposed to "just keep it" by using the dash. And since in this one case I do not want to add or change anything, but keep it and just force the redirect if it matches (trailing slash in working code), the RE backreference and substitution with itself, verbatim and in full, just doesn't seem necessary. However, if I do *not* do the useless substitute-with-self, I end up with my 301 redirection code being ignored... Again, do these results show a bug? Is the dash intended and expected to always default to 302, no matter the explicit code given? Or do I still not see what is wrong with the rules? guenther -- char *t="\10pse\0r\0dtu...@ghno\x4e\xc8\x79\xf4\xab\x51\x8a\x10\xf4\xf4\xc4"; main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i<l;i++){ i%8? c<<=1: (c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}} --------------------------------------------------------------------- The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project. See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info. To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org " from the digest: users-digest-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@httpd.apache.org
