You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to modperl@perl.apache.org by Andy Armstrong <an...@hexten.net> on 2007/01/10 15:12:17 UTC
Anyone using CGI::Simple?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi Folks,
On the Perl Modules Authors list yesterday Ovid wrote:
> Has anyone heard from James Freeman, the maintainer of CGI::Simple
> (http://search.cpan.org/dist/Cgi-Simple/)? It's not been updated in a
> couple of years, the outstanding bugs appear to mostly be related to
> the same issue, and I tried emailing him about this using the contact
> email he provided at http://www.perlmonks.org/?node=tachyon.
>
> I'm not particularly keen on taking over this distribution, but he's
> not fixing this bug or even responding. He also notes that Perl is a
> "fond corner of [his] past", suggesting that unless someone snags
> CGI::Simple, this very popular (and useful!) module will not be fixed.
It turns out the main bugs he's referring to are:
http://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=23519 "new modperl breaks
API again"
http://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=11896 "parameters missing
with latest mod_perl"
(although there are others that I intend to address too)
I grabbed a copy of the source, cleaned up the tests and fixed the
MP2 problem - or at least well enough that it now works with a quick
out-of-the-box MP2 install here. I don't have much experience of MP2
though so I'm interested to find out whether anyone here has been
affected by either of the bugs listed above and would be interested
in testing and commenting on the fix.
My version of CGI::Simple is here:
http://cpan.org/modules/by-authors/id/A/AN/ANDYA/CGI-
Simple-0.078.tar.gz
(It hasn't hit the CPAN index yet - I'm waiting to be given the
necessary permissions)
I'd be grateful if anyone could take the time to test the fix. I'd
also be interested to hear of any reasonably simple MP2 applications
that currently use CGI.pm that I could install here to check that
CGI::Simple works in place of CGI.pm as it should.
Thanks all.
- --
Andy Armstrong, hexten.net
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFFpPRDwoknRJZQnCERAl9CAJ49PYh3BxWaWzYOpzwcKEY8gkz4jQCfVGoy
rc69ELKqznH8C7qrAUArTwk=
=wzKo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Re: Anyone using CGI::Simple?
Posted by Perrin Harkins <pe...@elem.com>.
On Wed, 2007-01-10 at 14:12 +0000, Andy Armstrong wrote:
> It turns out the main bugs he's referring to are:
>
> http://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=23519 "new modperl breaks
> API again"
> http://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=11896 "parameters missing
> with latest mod_perl"
Maybe I'm just being naive, but why would a CGI module like this ever
use the mod_perl API for anything? It seems like it should just work
exactly the same way it does for CGI and if anything breaks it's a bug
in the mod_perl CGI emulation.
- Perrin
Re: Anyone using CGI::Simple?
Posted by Perrin Harkins <pe...@elem.com>.
On Wed, 2007-01-10 at 14:12 +0000, Andy Armstrong wrote:
> It turns out the main bugs he's referring to are:
>
> http://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=23519 "new modperl breaks
> API again"
> http://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=11896 "parameters missing
> with latest mod_perl"
Maybe I'm just being naive, but why would a CGI module like this ever
use the mod_perl API for anything? It seems like it should just work
exactly the same way it does for CGI and if anything breaks it's a bug
in the mod_perl CGI emulation.
- Perrin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Anyone using CGI::Simple?
Posted by Andy Armstrong <an...@hexten.net>.
On 10 Jan 2007, at 17:58, Randy Kobes wrote:
>> I started here because the bugs related to it not working with
>> mod_perl. So I figured I'd, you know, ask mod_perl people :)
>
> One place to perhaps start is the mod_perl tests. In
> particular, one could switch the t/modules/cgi*.t
> tests (and corresponding t/response/TestModules/cgi*.pm)
> to use CGI::Simple, rather than CGI, to test the
> compatibility. I had a quick look at this, and there
> seems to be still problems in this area.
Ah - I didn't check that MP tested CGI.pm. Thanks for the lead. I'll
investigate further.
--
Andy Armstrong, hexten.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Anyone using CGI::Simple?
Posted by Andy Armstrong <an...@hexten.net>.
On 10 Jan 2007, at 17:58, Randy Kobes wrote:
>> I started here because the bugs related to it not working with
>> mod_perl. So I figured I'd, you know, ask mod_perl people :)
>
> One place to perhaps start is the mod_perl tests. In
> particular, one could switch the t/modules/cgi*.t
> tests (and corresponding t/response/TestModules/cgi*.pm)
> to use CGI::Simple, rather than CGI, to test the
> compatibility. I had a quick look at this, and there
> seems to be still problems in this area.
Ah - I didn't check that MP tested CGI.pm. Thanks for the lead. I'll
investigate further.
--
Andy Armstrong, hexten.net
Re: Anyone using CGI::Simple?
Posted by Randy Kobes <ra...@theoryx5.uwinnipeg.ca>.
On Wed, 10 Jan 2007, Andy Armstrong wrote:
> On 10 Jan 2007, at 17:13, Michael Peters wrote:
>> Andy Armstrong wrote:
>>
>>> Part of my reason for posting is to try and work out whether anyone's
>>> actually using it.
>>
>> I'd say the user's of it on this list would be pretty
>> small. But I've heard it's popular for normal CGI folks
>> and people using FCGI since they can save on memory and
>> can't use the Apache::Request stuff.
>>
>> I'd try posting a query to perlmonks.
>
> I started here because the bugs related to it not working
> with mod_perl. So I figured I'd, you know, ask mod_perl
> people :)
One place to perhaps start is the mod_perl tests. In
particular, one could switch the t/modules/cgi*.t
tests (and corresponding t/response/TestModules/cgi*.pm)
to use CGI::Simple, rather than CGI, to test the
compatibility. I had a quick look at this, and there
seems to be still problems in this area.
--
best regards,
Randy Kobes
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Anyone using CGI::Simple?
Posted by Randy Kobes <ra...@theoryx5.uwinnipeg.ca>.
On Wed, 10 Jan 2007, Andy Armstrong wrote:
> On 10 Jan 2007, at 17:13, Michael Peters wrote:
>> Andy Armstrong wrote:
>>
>>> Part of my reason for posting is to try and work out whether anyone's
>>> actually using it.
>>
>> I'd say the user's of it on this list would be pretty
>> small. But I've heard it's popular for normal CGI folks
>> and people using FCGI since they can save on memory and
>> can't use the Apache::Request stuff.
>>
>> I'd try posting a query to perlmonks.
>
> I started here because the bugs related to it not working
> with mod_perl. So I figured I'd, you know, ask mod_perl
> people :)
One place to perhaps start is the mod_perl tests. In
particular, one could switch the t/modules/cgi*.t
tests (and corresponding t/response/TestModules/cgi*.pm)
to use CGI::Simple, rather than CGI, to test the
compatibility. I had a quick look at this, and there
seems to be still problems in this area.
--
best regards,
Randy Kobes
Re: Anyone using CGI::Simple?
Posted by Andy Armstrong <an...@hexten.net>.
On 10 Jan 2007, at 17:13, Michael Peters wrote:
> Andy Armstrong wrote:
>
>> Part of my reason for posting is to try and work out whether anyone's
>> actually using it.
>
> I'd say the user's of it on this list would be pretty small. But
> I've heard it's
> popular for normal CGI folks and people using FCGI since they can
> save on memory
> and can't use the Apache::Request stuff.
>
> I'd try posting a query to perlmonks.
I started here because the bugs related to it not working with
mod_perl. So I figured I'd, you know, ask mod_perl people :)
--
Andy Armstrong, hexten.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Anyone using CGI::Simple?
Posted by Andy Armstrong <an...@hexten.net>.
On 10 Jan 2007, at 17:13, Michael Peters wrote:
> Andy Armstrong wrote:
>
>> Part of my reason for posting is to try and work out whether anyone's
>> actually using it.
>
> I'd say the user's of it on this list would be pretty small. But
> I've heard it's
> popular for normal CGI folks and people using FCGI since they can
> save on memory
> and can't use the Apache::Request stuff.
>
> I'd try posting a query to perlmonks.
I started here because the bugs related to it not working with
mod_perl. So I figured I'd, you know, ask mod_perl people :)
--
Andy Armstrong, hexten.net
Re: Anyone using CGI::Simple?
Posted by Michael Peters <mp...@plusthree.com>.
Andy Armstrong wrote:
> Part of my reason for posting is to try and work out whether anyone's
> actually using it.
I'd say the user's of it on this list would be pretty small. But I've heard it's
popular for normal CGI folks and people using FCGI since they can save on memory
and can't use the Apache::Request stuff.
I'd try posting a query to perlmonks.
--
Michael Peters
Developer
Plus Three, LP
Re: Anyone using CGI::Simple?
Posted by Andy Armstrong <an...@hexten.net>.
On 10 Jan 2007, at 17:19, Mark Stosberg wrote:
> I still like the CGI::Simple is lighter weight, but it just didn't
> work
> well enough for me. (I'm sorry my memory doesn't recall the exact
> issues
> anymore... it may have been related to file uploading.)
Ring any bells?
http://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=14838
I've just been working with your test case this afternoon funnily
enough. I can see what it's doing wrong but the code is fragile
enough and the test coverage poor enough that I'm proceeding with
caution. If I'm going to fix it I need to beef the tests up first.
--
Andy Armstrong, hexten.net
Re: Anyone using CGI::Simple?
Posted by Mark Stosberg <ma...@summersault.com>.
Andy Armstrong wrote:
> On 10 Jan 2007, at 17:05, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>> Why would anyone use this instead of CGI.pm?
>
> If you expect me to justify it you've got the wrong guy Randal :)
>
> Ovid reckons people use it so I pitched in to try and fix it. The code
> is quite nasty in places - but I'll fix it if people like it for
> whatever reason.
>
> Part of my reason for posting is to try and work out whether anyone's
> actually using it.
I had tried it for the perceived performance benefits. It's been awhile,
so at this point I all recall that I had some strange issues with it,
and returned to use CGI.pm, which did not have the issues and worked
well enough.
I still like the CGI::Simple is lighter weight, but it just didn't work
well enough for me. (I'm sorry my memory doesn't recall the exact issues
anymore... it may have been related to file uploading.)
Mark
Re: Anyone using CGI::Simple?
Posted by Andy Armstrong <an...@hexten.net>.
On 10 Jan 2007, at 17:05, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> Why would anyone use this instead of CGI.pm?
If you expect me to justify it you've got the wrong guy Randal :)
Ovid reckons people use it so I pitched in to try and fix it. The
code is quite nasty in places - but I'll fix it if people like it for
whatever reason.
Part of my reason for posting is to try and work out whether anyone's
actually using it.
--
Andy Armstrong, hexten.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Anyone using CGI::Simple?
Posted by "JupiterHost.Net" <ml...@jupiterhost.net>.
>>> Why would anyone use this instead of CGI.pm?
>>
>>
>> I like it because:
>> - uploads are handled more intuitively IMHO
>> - no HTML stuff (although CGI's HTML methods are pretty slick)
>> - no function/method oddness
>>
>> Not sure about its mod_perl issues, I use it mostly under persistent
>> perl as anormal CGI...
>
>
> Splendid. Well the first release I've made is on CPAN now and I'm going
> to keep working on it to resolve the outstanding bugs and generally
> clean the code up.
Nice, looks like we're in good hands :) Thanks Andy
Re: Anyone using CGI::Simple?
Posted by Andy Armstrong <an...@hexten.net>.
On 16 Jan 2007, at 16:45, Jiří Pavlovský wrote:
>> Do you still have those changes? I'd be interested to see a diff
>> against the released version if possible.
>
> Those were just Apache -> Apache2 renaming issues.
OK, I think I got all those, thanks.
--
Andy Armstrong, hexten.net
Re: Anyone using CGI::Simple?
Posted by Jiří Pavlovský <ji...@getnet.cz>.
Andy Armstrong wrote:
> On 16 Jan 2007, at 16:25, Jiří Pavlovský wrote:
>> I use it too. In CGI::Application run under Registry. I had to make
>> few changes for it to run under mp2 IIRC.
>
> Do you still have those changes? I'd be interested to see a diff
> against the released version if possible.
Those were just Apache -> Apache2 renaming issues.
Re: Anyone using CGI::Simple?
Posted by Andy Armstrong <an...@hexten.net>.
On 16 Jan 2007, at 16:25, Jiří Pavlovský wrote:
> I use it too. In CGI::Application run under Registry. I had to make
> few changes for it to run under mp2 IIRC.
Do you still have those changes? I'd be interested to see a diff
against the released version if possible.
--
Andy Armstrong, hexten.net
Re: Anyone using CGI::Simple?
Posted by Jiří Pavlovský <ji...@getnet.cz>.
Andy Armstrong wrote:
>>>>> Has anyone heard from James Freeman, the maintainer of CGI::Simple
>>>>> (http://search.cpan.org/dist/Cgi-Simple/)? It's not been updated
>>>>> in a
>>>>> couple of years, the outstanding bugs appear to mostly be related to
>>>>> the same issue, and I tried emailing him about this using the contact
>>>>> email he provided at http://www.perlmonks.org/?node=tachyon.
>>> Why would anyone use this instead of CGI.pm?
>>
>> I like it because:
>> - uploads are handled more intuitively IMHO
>> - no HTML stuff (although CGI's HTML methods are pretty slick)
>> - no function/method oddness
>>
>> Not sure about its mod_perl issues, I use it mostly under persistent
>> perl as anormal CGI...
I use it too. In CGI::Application run under Registry. I had to make few
changes for it to run under mp2 IIRC.
Re: Anyone using CGI::Simple?
Posted by Andy Armstrong <an...@hexten.net>.
On 16 Jan 2007, at 16:09, JupiterHost.Net wrote:
> Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>
>>>>>>> "Andy" == Andy Armstrong <an...@hexten.net> writes:
>>>> Has anyone heard from James Freeman, the maintainer of CGI::Simple
>>>> (http://search.cpan.org/dist/Cgi-Simple/)? It's not been
>>>> updated in a
>>>> couple of years, the outstanding bugs appear to mostly be
>>>> related to
>>>> the same issue, and I tried emailing him about this using the
>>>> contact
>>>> email he provided at http://www.perlmonks.org/?node=tachyon.
>> Why would anyone use this instead of CGI.pm?
>
> I like it because:
> - uploads are handled more intuitively IMHO
> - no HTML stuff (although CGI's HTML methods are pretty slick)
> - no function/method oddness
>
> Not sure about its mod_perl issues, I use it mostly under
> persistent perl as anormal CGI...
Splendid. Well the first release I've made is on CPAN now and I'm
going to keep working on it to resolve the outstanding bugs and
generally clean the code up.
--
Andy Armstrong, hexten.net
Re: Anyone using CGI::Simple?
Posted by "JupiterHost.Net" <ml...@jupiterhost.net>.
Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>>>>>>"Andy" == Andy Armstrong <an...@hexten.net> writes:
>
>
>>>Has anyone heard from James Freeman, the maintainer of CGI::Simple
>>>(http://search.cpan.org/dist/Cgi-Simple/)? It's not been updated in a
>>>couple of years, the outstanding bugs appear to mostly be related to
>>>the same issue, and I tried emailing him about this using the contact
>>>email he provided at http://www.perlmonks.org/?node=tachyon.
>
>
> Why would anyone use this instead of CGI.pm?
I like it because:
- uploads are handled more intuitively IMHO
- no HTML stuff (although CGI's HTML methods are pretty slick)
- no function/method oddness
Not sure about its mod_perl issues, I use it mostly under persistent
perl as anormal CGI...
Re: Anyone using CGI::Simple?
Posted by Andy Armstrong <an...@hexten.net>.
On 10 Jan 2007, at 17:05, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> Why would anyone use this instead of CGI.pm?
If you expect me to justify it you've got the wrong guy Randal :)
Ovid reckons people use it so I pitched in to try and fix it. The
code is quite nasty in places - but I'll fix it if people like it for
whatever reason.
Part of my reason for posting is to try and work out whether anyone's
actually using it.
--
Andy Armstrong, hexten.net
Re: Anyone using CGI::Simple?
Posted by "Randal L. Schwartz" <me...@stonehenge.com>.
>>>>> "Andy" == Andy Armstrong <an...@hexten.net> writes:
>> Has anyone heard from James Freeman, the maintainer of CGI::Simple
>> (http://search.cpan.org/dist/Cgi-Simple/)? It's not been updated in a
>> couple of years, the outstanding bugs appear to mostly be related to
>> the same issue, and I tried emailing him about this using the contact
>> email he provided at http://www.perlmonks.org/?node=tachyon.
Why would anyone use this instead of CGI.pm?
--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<me...@stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!
Re: Anyone using CGI::Simple?
Posted by "Randal L. Schwartz" <me...@stonehenge.com>.
>>>>> "Andy" == Andy Armstrong <an...@hexten.net> writes:
>> Has anyone heard from James Freeman, the maintainer of CGI::Simple
>> (http://search.cpan.org/dist/Cgi-Simple/)? It's not been updated in a
>> couple of years, the outstanding bugs appear to mostly be related to
>> the same issue, and I tried emailing him about this using the contact
>> email he provided at http://www.perlmonks.org/?node=tachyon.
Why would anyone use this instead of CGI.pm?
--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<me...@stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org