Skip to content
  1. Jan 01, 1999
    • Ralf S. Engelschall's avatar
      · be3aeea1
      Ralf S. Engelschall authored 
      Fix a few minor inconsistencies related to directive scoping
============================================================

1. httpd -h

Under "httpd -h" one gets a nice English description in which scope a
directive can occur. But we talk here only about <Directory> and <Location>,
although <Files> is treated the same (also with `cmd->override ==
ACCESS_CONF|OR_ALL'). So I think it's correct to also list <Files>, too.

2. Used scope variants

Currently we have 203 directives and they use the following scopes (the
numbers in parenthesis gives the number of directives using a particular
scope):

   RSRC_CONF (106)
   RSRC_CONF|ACCESS_CONF (5)
   RSRC_CONF|ACCESS_CONF|OR_ALL (1)            <--
   RSRC_CONF|ACCESS_CONF|OR_AUTHCFG (2)        <--
   ACCESS_CONF (5)
   OR_AUTHCFG (20)
   OR_LIMIT (3)
   OR_OPTIONS (4)
   OR_FILEINFO (21)
   OR_INDEXES (23)
   OR_ALL (13)

This is well spreaded and sounds reasonable. Except for
the two classes:

   RSRC_CONF|ACCESS_CONF|OR_ALL (1)
   RSRC_CONF|ACCESS_CONF|OR_AUTHCFG (2)

The first one is just a syntax overkill. It means only OR_ALL, because OR_ALL
includes (implicitly) already RSRC_CONF and ACCESS_CONF. So, when we fix
this to OR_ALL we get:

   RSRC_CONF (106)
   RSRC_CONF|ACCESS_CONF (5)
   RSRC_CONF|ACCESS_CONF|OR_AUTHCFG (2)        <--
   ACCESS_CONF (5)
   OR_AUTHCFG (20)
   OR_LIMIT (3)
   OR_OPTIONS (4)
   OR_FILEINFO (21)
   OR_INDEXES (23)
   OR_ALL (14)

The remaining RSRC_CONF|ACCESS_CONF|OR_AUTHCFG is used by two directives:
UseCanonicalName and ContentDigest. Two not too old directives which were
added mostly at the same time. They're are implemented the same way.
But the scope looks incorrect. Why?

First, it's again syntax overkill, ok. We can reduce it to
RSRC_CONF|OR_AUTHCFG. But when we compare it to all other used scopes, it
looks very inconsistent. No other of the 203 directives want to be applicable
in such a non-orthoginal scope: on the first hand inside the AuthConfig scope
(which means .htaccess under "AllowOverride AuthConfig" plus _INSIDE_ of
<Directory>/<Location>/<Files> sections in httpd.conf only) and on the other
hand also in RSRC_CONF (which means _OUTSIDE_ of
<Directory>/<Location>/<Files> sections in httpd.conf only). Sure, finally
it's everywhere in httpd.conf plus .htaccess under AuthConfig scope.  But it's
not intuitive: Directives which want to be applicable in such a total scope
use OR_OPTIONS, OR_FILEINFO or OR_INDEXES. And when we think about
UseCanonicalName and ContentDigest we find out that they belongs more to
Options, XBitHack and CheckSpelling than to any AuthXXXX directives.

So, I propose to change the scope of those two directives to OR_OPTIONS.  It
makes no big difference, of course. It still is useable everwhere inside
httpd.conf, but inside .htaccess now under Options instead of AuthConfig.  And
it both belongs to the more correct group of directives and makes our list of
used scopes more consistent.

With the above patch be get this consistent scope-list:

   RSRC_CONF (106)
   RSRC_CONF|ACCESS_CONF (5)
   ACCESS_CONF (5)
   OR_AUTHCFG (20)
   OR_LIMIT (3)
   OR_OPTIONS (6)
   OR_FILEINFO (21)
   OR_INDEXES (23)
   OR_ALL (14)

When we take into account that _theoretically_ there are a lot more variants
of these or'ed values are possible, this list is _VERY_ clean. Actually it's
the most clean variant I can think of (except for the fact that the whole
mechanism is a horrible mess ;-)...


git-svn-id: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk@82558 13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68
      be3aeea1
  3. Dec 27, 1998
  5. Dec 18, 1998
  7. Dec 17, 1998
    • Ralf S. Engelschall's avatar
      Cleanup the command line options: `-?' was documented to show the usage list · 504559df
      Ralf S. Engelschall authored 
      but does it with an error because `?' is not a valid command. OTOH a lot of
users expect `-h' to print such a usage list and instead are annoyed for ages
by our huge unreadable list of directives.  So we now changed the command line
options this way:

 1. `-L' => `-R'
    Intent: we need `-L' to be free, and `-R' for the DSO run-time path is
    very similar to the popular linker option.

 2. `-h' => `-L'
    Intent: while -l gives the small list of modules, -L now gives the
    large list of directives implemented by these modules.  This is also
    consistent with -v (short version info) and -V (large version info).

 3. `-?' => `-h'
    Intent: it's now the expected option ;-)

The manual page was adjusted accordingly.

Submitted by: Ralf S. Engelschall
Reviewed by: Randy Terbush
PR: 2714


git-svn-id: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk@82497 13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68
      504559df
  9. Dec 15, 1998
  11. Dec 13, 1998
  13. Dec 06, 1998
  15. Dec 04, 1998
  17. Dec 02, 1998
  19. Nov 23, 1998
  21. Nov 20, 1998
  23. Nov 18, 1998
  25. Nov 16, 1998
  27. Nov 12, 1998
  29. Nov 09, 1998
  31. Nov 07, 1998
  33. Nov 06, 1998
  35. Nov 04, 1998
  37. Nov 03, 1998
  39. Oct 29, 1998
    • Manoj Kasichainula's avatar
      · 9a165228
      Manoj Kasichainula authored 
      PR: 2706
Changed references to "/status" to "/server-status". This isn't really
necessary, but a user was confused by the difference between the docs and
the configuration file, and consistency is a good thing.


git-svn-id: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk@82329 13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68
      9a165228
  41. Oct 23, 1998
  43. Oct 22, 1998
  45. Oct 21, 1998
  47. Oct 19, 1998
  49. Oct 16, 1998
  51. Oct 15, 1998
  53. Oct 07, 1998
  55. Oct 06, 1998
  57. Oct 03, 1998