than mod_rewrite
for per directory. So, any chances to go ahead?
Regards,
Manuel.
"Manuel VáZquez Acosta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Hi internals:
>
> I made an addition to Apache 1.3.x SAPI; and I would like you to take a
look
>
Oops, scratch this, I did something stupid in the httpd.conf, which make it
not work for 404.
"Manuel VáZquez Acosta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> The following was emailed to me and it worked fine for URL which resolved
to
> an existing fil
The following was emailed to me and it worked fine for URL which resolved to
an existing file, but it's failing to do so when otherwise the URL cannot be
mapped to a physical file.
However, the 2nd motivation on removing every bit of php from the sight of
designers, seems not to be fullfilled righ
I'm starting to read mod_rewrite doc [1]; but in my current state of not
knowing, my mind starts popping questions like:
Does this URL to URL mapping will leave original URI visible somewhere or
somehow to PHP (ie. $_SERVER['REQUEST_URI'])?
Does it leave the original PATH_TRANSLATED visible to PH
Hi internals:
I made an addition to Apache 1.3.x SAPI; and I would like you to take a look
at it, so you can evaluate if it has a chance to go official.
Basically, the new feature lets Apache users to set a PHP Script Handler,
this is, for each request made to the server the PHP Script Handler is
Solved:
find . | xargs touch
Thanks,
Manuel.
"Robert Silva" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Try google('Clock skew detected');
-Original Message-
From: Manuel Vázquez Acosta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 3
Hi all:
I'm very new to PHP internals, and I would like to get some help:
I added a few lines of code to sapi_apache.c and mod_php4.c (from original
source of php-4.3.8); but when I make I get:
make: warning: Clock skew detected. Your build may be incomplete.
What I'm missing here. Please, be
> There's a good chance that later PHP versions (maybe 5.2 or 6 or whatever)
> have something like namespaces or packages which require at least the
> keyword 'import'. That's an example for the reason i never use names that
> are used as keywords in other languages.
>
That sounds like good news!
[Is this the right news?]
Recently I downloaded PHP 5.0.0 and read the RFCs, I sadly noticed that a
Namespace proposal was declined. Why? I've been using PHP for many years and
I've found problems when trying to "glue" several third parties codes.
PEAR has come with a not-quite-nice solution to t
