UseCanonicalName no longer in Directory containers?

[Manoj Kasichainula <ma...@raleigh.ibm.com>]

When the mod_vhost_alias patch was committed, it also changed the
scope in which UseCanonicalName was allowed. I'm guessing this had
something to do with the "dns" argument that was also added, but why
were those scopes removed?

-- 
Manoj Kasichainula - manojk@raleigh.ibm.com
IBM, Apache Development

Re: UseCanonicalName no longer in Directory containers?

[Tony Finch <do...@dotat.at>]

Ryan Bloom <rb...@raleigh.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> It would be nice if 2.0 had more fine-grained admin control of
>> .htaccess files...
>
>Do I hear a volunteer?????

:-) I hesitate to sign up when I don't know where the time would come
from, but I've thought about it a little. Would it be acceptable to
significantly break compatibility with the 1.3 configuration language?
What I would do is throw away the Options directive and replace it
with a separate directive to control each option. I would also replace
AllowOverride with a more generic system that could {en,dis}able each
directive from appearing in .htaccess files, individually or in groups.
(I haven't thought much about how to define groups of directives.)

Tony.
-- 
dot it at

Re: UseCanonicalName no longer in Directory containers?

[Ryan Bloom <rb...@raleigh.ibm.com>]

> It would be nice if 2.0 had more fine-grained admin control of
> .htaccess files...

Do I hear a volunteer?????

Ryan

_______________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom		rbb@raleigh.ibm.com
4205 S Miami Blvd	
RTP, NC 27709		It's a beautiful sight to see good dancers 
			doing simple steps.  It's a painful sight to
			see beginners doing complicated patterns.	

Re: UseCanonicalName no longer in Directory containers?

[Tony Finch <do...@dotat.at>]

Manoj Kasichainula <ma...@raleigh.ibm.com> wrote:
>When the mod_vhost_alias patch was committed, it also changed the
>scope in which UseCanonicalName was allowed. I'm guessing this had
>something to do with the "dns" argument that was also added, but why
>were those scopes removed?

The reason is to prevent customers from screwing up the contents of
the shared acces log in such a way that it cannot be split and
distributed reliably. (Our customers can point any domain name at
their IP address and expect it to work, but if we don't know about it
and they've set UseCanonicalName off then we can't give them their
logs or do the accounting correctly.) I only intended to prevent it
from being used in .htaccess files; if I affected <Directory> sections
as well that was an error.

It would be nice if 2.0 had more fine-grained admin control of
.htaccess files...

Tony.
-- 
i am the dot at dotat dot at