You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Ian Holsman <li...@holsman.net> on 2002/09/11 01:04:31 UTC
Include conf.d/*.conf patch from redhat
does anyone recall if there was a good reason not to include this patch
in the main distribution ?
[PATCH] 1.3.X Re: Include conf.d/*.conf
Posted by Sander van Zoest <sa...@yahoo-inc.com>.
On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 06:56:12AM +0100, Joe Orton wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 09:21:17PM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 04:04:31PM -0700, Ian Holsman wrote:
> > > does anyone recall if there was a good reason not to include this patch
> > > in the main distribution ?
> >
> > What patch is this? -- justin
> I hadn't had time to submit the revised patch yet: here it is.
Please find a patch for 1.3 attached.
This patch does *not* remove the "noise".
Cheers,
--
Sander van Zoest +1 (619) 881-3000
Yahoo!, Inc. sander@yahoo-inc.com
<http://www.yahoo.com/> <http://sander.vanzoest.com/>
Re: Include conf.d/*.conf patch from redhat
Posted by Ian Holsman <li...@holsman.net>.
On Tue, 10 Sep 2002 22:56:12 -0700, Joe Orton wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 09:21:17PM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 04:04:31PM -0700, Ian Holsman wrote:
>> > does anyone recall if there was a good reason not to include this patch
>> > in the main distribution ?
>>
>> What patch is this? -- justin
>
> I hadn't had time to submit the revised patch yet: here it is.
>
> This adds support for using fnmatch patterns in the final path segment
> of an Include statement, e.g. "Include /foo/bar/*.conf". It also
> removes the noise on stderr during config dir processing.
>
> (the ability to recursively process config directories is not removed,
> as requested)
committed.
maybe this will go into 2.0.41.. but It will definatly make 2.0.42
--ian
Re: Include conf.d/*.conf patch from redhat
Posted by Brian Pane <br...@apache.org>.
Joe Orton wrote:
>On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 09:21:17PM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>
>
>>On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 04:04:31PM -0700, Ian Holsman wrote:
>>
>>
>>>does anyone recall if there was a good reason not to include this patch
>>>in the main distribution ?
>>>
>>>
>>What patch is this? -- justin
>>
>>
>
>I hadn't had time to submit the revised patch yet: here it is.
>
>This adds support for using fnmatch patterns in the final path segment
>of an Include statement, e.g. "Include /foo/bar/*.conf". It also
>removes the noise on stderr during config dir processing.
>
+1 on the patch.
Brian
Re: Include conf.d/*.conf patch from redhat
Posted by Joe Orton <jo...@redhat.com>.
On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 09:21:17PM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 04:04:31PM -0700, Ian Holsman wrote:
> > does anyone recall if there was a good reason not to include this patch
> > in the main distribution ?
>
> What patch is this? -- justin
I hadn't had time to submit the revised patch yet: here it is.
This adds support for using fnmatch patterns in the final path segment
of an Include statement, e.g. "Include /foo/bar/*.conf". It also
removes the noise on stderr during config dir processing.
(the ability to recursively process config directories is not removed,
as requested)
--- server/config.c 19 Aug 2002 20:40:08 -0000 1.155
+++ server/config.c 11 Sep 2002 05:47:36 -0000
@@ -75,6 +75,7 @@
#include "apr_strings.h"
#include "apr_portable.h"
#include "apr_file_io.h"
+#include "apr_fnmatch.h"
#define APR_WANT_STDIO
#define APR_WANT_STRFUNC
@@ -1442,6 +1443,7 @@
apr_finfo_t finfo;
const char *errmsg;
ap_configfile_t *cfp;
+ int ispatt;
/* don't require conf/httpd.conf if we have a -C or -c switch */
if ((ap_server_pre_read_config->nelts
@@ -1451,31 +1453,52 @@
return;
}
- /*
- * here we want to check if the candidate file is really a
- * directory, and most definitely NOT a symlink (to prevent
- * horrible loops). If so, let's recurse and toss it back
- * into the function.
- */
- if (ap_is_rdirectory(ptemp, fname)) {
+ ispatt = apr_fnmatch_test(fname);
+ if (ispatt || ap_is_rdirectory(p, fname)) {
apr_dir_t *dirp;
apr_finfo_t dirent;
int current;
apr_array_header_t *candidates = NULL;
fnames *fnew;
apr_status_t rv;
- char errmsg[120];
+ char errmsg[120], *path = apr_pstrdup(p, fname), *pattern = NULL;
+
+ if (ispatt) {
+ pattern = ap_strrchr(path, '/');
+
+ AP_DEBUG_ASSERT(pattern != NULL); /* path must be absolute. */
+
+ *pattern++ = '\0';
+
+ if (apr_fnmatch_test(path)) {
+ fprintf(stderr, "%s: wildcard patterns not allowed in Include "
+ "%s\n", ap_server_argv0, fname);
+ exit(1);
+ }
+
+ if (!ap_is_rdirectory(p, path)){
+ fprintf(stderr, "%s: Include directory '%s' not found",
+ ap_server_argv0, path);
+ exit(1);
+ }
+
+ if (!apr_fnmatch_test(pattern)) {
+ fprintf(stderr, "%s: must include a wildcard pattern "
+ "for Include %s\n", ap_server_argv0, fname);
+ exit(1);
+ }
+
+ }
/*
* first course of business is to grok all the directory
* entries here and store 'em away. Recall we need full pathnames
* for this.
*/
- fprintf(stderr, "Processing config directory: %s\n", fname);
- rv = apr_dir_open(&dirp, fname, p);
+ rv = apr_dir_open(&dirp, path, p);
if (rv != APR_SUCCESS) {
fprintf(stderr, "%s: could not open config directory %s: %s\n",
- ap_server_argv0, fname,
+ ap_server_argv0, path,
apr_strerror(rv, errmsg, sizeof errmsg));
exit(1);
}
@@ -1484,9 +1507,12 @@
while (apr_dir_read(&dirent, APR_FINFO_DIRENT, dirp) == APR_SUCCESS) {
/* strip out '.' and '..' */
if (strcmp(dirent.name, ".")
- && strcmp(dirent.name, "..")) {
+ && strcmp(dirent.name, "..")
+ && (!ispatt ||
+ apr_fnmatch(pattern, dirent.name,
+ FNM_PERIOD) == APR_SUCCESS)) {
fnew = (fnames *) apr_array_push(candidates);
- fnew->fname = ap_make_full_path(p, fname, dirent.name);
+ fnew->fname = ap_make_full_path(p, path, dirent.name);
}
}
@@ -1501,7 +1527,6 @@
*/
for (current = 0; current < candidates->nelts; ++current) {
fnew = &((fnames *) candidates->elts)[current];
- fprintf(stderr, " Processing config file: %s\n", fnew->fname);
ap_process_resource_config(s, fnew->fname, conftree, p, ptemp);
}
}
Re: Include conf.d/*.conf patch from redhat
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <je...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 04:04:31PM -0700, Ian Holsman wrote:
> does anyone recall if there was a good reason not to include this patch
> in the main distribution ?
What patch is this? -- justin