Re: run_sub_req() help please

[Randy Terbush <ra...@zyzzyva.com>]

> On Wed, 19 Jun 1996, Randy Terbush wrote:
> 
> > Can someone give me some feedback regarding this problem I posted
> > about yesterday?
> > 
> > Why does the following not work as it did in previous versions?
> > 
> > 
> > 	r->handler = "some_handler";
> > 	run_sub_req (r);
> 
> Are you setting up r properly? Is r the same r you were passed by the
> server, or is it some new r that you've made? If it's a new r, then you
> need to do all sorts of things. (copy what the sub_req_lookup_* functions
> do). Specifically, it sounds like maybe you aren't setting r->connection
> properly, which SET_BYTES_SENT needs to do what it does.

r is being passed in by the server. As I mentioned, this same code
worked as expected prior to getting it in sync with current b4.

> > sub->main is NULL.
> 
> It sounds like you're trying to short-circuit the sub_req mechanisms in
> the core, and something's getting screwed up because you're not doing it
> properly.
> 
> You might try, assuming you really do have r set up correctly,
> instead of run_sub_req(), calling invoke_handler() yourself. Then you
> avoid all the sub_req stuff.

Perhaps this is what I should have been doing all along. I'll give
it a go. Still, it would be nice to know what has changed....

Re: run_sub_req() help please

[Alexei Kosut <ak...@organic.com>]

On Wed, 19 Jun 1996, Randy Terbush wrote:

[...]

> r is being passed in by the server. As I mentioned, this same code
> worked as expected prior to getting it in sync with current b4.

Odd. I'd imagine it'd work too...

[...]

> Perhaps this is what I should have been doing all along. I'll give
> it a go. Still, it would be nice to know what has changed....

Well, you say it's failing in SET_BYTES_SENT, which means it probably has
something to do with RST's patch to restore r->bytes_sent.

-- Alexei Kosut <ak...@organic.com>            The Apache HTTP Server 
   http://www.nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us/~akosut/      http://www.apache.org/