DO NOT REPLY [Bug 8516] - ScriptAction to invoke a file instead of a URL path?

[bu...@apache.org]

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8516>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8516

ScriptAction to invoke a file instead of a URL path?

wrowe@apache.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Component|mod_isapi                   |mod_actions
         OS/Version|Windows NT/2K               |All
           Platform|Other                       |All
            Summary|Improvement to mod_isapi    |ScriptAction to invoke a
                   |                            |file instead of a URL path?
            Version|2.0.32                      |HEAD



------- Additional Comments From wrowe@apache.org  2002-05-15 03:12 -------

  I see your issue, although I wouldn't classify it as a problem, I'd
  suggest we reframe this as an "Enhancement request to mod_action" to
  effectively implement a 'script action' that is hidden from the
  perspective of the envvars reviewed by the script.

  HOWEVER, SOAPISAP.DLL WAS AN ANALOGY!!!  Suppose the ISAPI will
  be c:\mydlldir\mydll.dll and http://localhost/virtdir/myfile.wsdl
  will be invoked.

  ScriptAlias /wsdl "c:/mydlldir/mydll.dll"
  Action my-handler "/wsdl"
  AddHandler my-handler .wsdl

  Is a much simpler way of saying things.

  I'd suggest the improvement would be an Action that maps, instead
  of to a URI, into a File.  Say, a ScriptAction directive (ScriptAlias
  plus Action, eh?)

  Now this could be applied [explicitly] to cause a certain program or
  module to be invoked for a given class of requests, as follows;

  ScriptAction my-handler "c:/mydlldir/mydll.dll"
  AddHandler my-handler .wsdl

  I'll ask Josh Slive and others to look at this proposal and tell me
  why we don't need new directives [surely we can already do this, no?]

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