You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to docs@httpd.apache.org by Igor Galić <i....@brainsware.org> on 2008/04/15 21:41:58 UTC

[PATCH] RFC reference in core.xml

Hi folks,

I stumbled over core.xml referencing the obsolete RFC2068 instead of RFC2616.
The attatched patch is against core.xml*, core.html*

So long,
Igor

Tel./Fax: +431 / 91 333 41
Mobil   : +43699 / 122 96 338

Re: [PATCH] RFC reference in core.xml

Posted by Vincent Bray <no...@gmail.com>.
On 15/04/2008, Igor Galić <i....@brainsware.org> wrote:
>  I stumbled over core.xml referencing the obsolete RFC2068 instead of RFC2616.
>  The attatched patch is against core.xml*, core.html*

Patch applied and committed, thanks.

-- 
noodl

Re: [PATCH] RFC reference in core.xml

Posted by Tony Stevenson <to...@pc-tony.com>.
Vincent Bray wrote:
> On 15/04/2008, Igor Galić <i....@brainsware.org> wrote:
>   
>>  Hi folks,
>>     
>
> Hey jMCg,
>
>   
>>  I stumbled over core.xml referencing the obsolete RFC2068 instead of RFC2616.
>>  The attatched patch is against core.xml*, core.html*
>>     
>
> That whole sentence makes no sense to me.
>
> "This directive enables the generation of Content-MD5 headers as
> defined in RFC1864 respectively RFC2068.
>
>
> Anyone, what's "respectively" doing there?
>
>   
/me thinks you should enable your IRC jmcg parser before applying the patch

:-)





---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org

Re: [PATCH] RFC reference in core.xml

Posted by Vincent Bray <no...@gmail.com>.
On 15/04/2008, Igor Galić <i....@brainsware.org> wrote:
>  Hi folks,

Hey jMCg,

>  I stumbled over core.xml referencing the obsolete RFC2068 instead of RFC2616.
>  The attatched patch is against core.xml*, core.html*

That whole sentence makes no sense to me.

"This directive enables the generation of Content-MD5 headers as
defined in RFC1864 respectively RFC2068.


Anyone, what's "respectively" doing there?

-- 
noodl