Hi Stas, Thanks for responding.
> >this work I convert POST requests to GET requests (so the parameters are > >not lost, based on a Geoff-example) and make sure that they get populated > >to the subrequest (via a transhandler). This works... worked :-( > > what has changed since it was working? What changed was the way CGI.pm is working. Since some version in the history it started to use XHTML as default and with it Lincoln changed the default encoding to multipart/form-data. As I said, this behaviour can be changed, but that mechanism does not co-operate reliably with mod_perl. Anyhow, I gather that wanting to support uploads kind of makes it necessary to use multipart posts. > >I try to avoid using it because (a) it is heavy (is it?), > > you must be kidding, Frank. libapreq heavy? it's much lighter and faster > than CGI.pm, check the benchmarks: Yep, sorry - didn't mean it lik that. I compared using APR to not using it at all. When I use CGI I do this because I "like" the way it handles forms and allows me to perl-code HTML. It is possible however that I turn away from CGI.pm as well though. > >(b) it eats POST data in a way that CGI can no longer handle it properly, > right, which is why you should move to Apache2, where it doesn't happen. > > (c) if I want to change to Apache2 every usage of APR must be rechecked. > what do you mean? Combining the two: the last time I looked into using Apache2 was more than half a year ago. At that time there was no Apache::Request and, contrary to what you might deduce from my writing above, I use(d) it in rather a lot of places. Oh and... I have your (and co-author) Practical Guide to mod_perl and Geoffs (and co-author) Cookbook, use those rather heavily and lack good books on mp2. So perhaps I am also a bit afraid of the dark... BTW - while speaking to you on this subject ;-): while searching for this issue I found, on the perl.apache.org website (http://perl.apache.org/docs/1.0/guide/snippets.html#Reusing_Data_from_POST_request) the text "But what do we do with large multipart file uploads? [...] switch the request method from POST to GET, and store the POST data in the query string. This handler does exactly this:" AFAIK now this is incorrect. Seen the rest of the text, it should better read: "As long as you do not use multipart/form-data encoded POSTs (like with file uploads) you can also alter the request. A transparent..." Do you agree? To whom and how should I send such a correction? Bye! Frank
