Re: Phase/URL repeat

2005-12-15 Thread Josh Narins
From: "Philip M. Gollucci" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I haven't followed this whole thread, so I may be way off base here: If you're implementing a filter, you're filter handlers _will_ be called as many times as neccessary. You can account for multiple invocations or pass along information in $f->c

Re: Phase/URL repeat

2005-12-13 Thread Philip M. Gollucci
I haven't followed this whole thread, so I may be way off base here: If you're implementing a filter, you're filter handlers _will_ be called as many times as neccessary. You can account for multiple invocations or pass along information in $f->ctx() see the filter examples on the docs site.

Re: Phase/URL repeat

2005-12-12 Thread Josh Narins
From: Jeremy Nixon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Josh Narins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Is it breaking anything? > > A fixup handler that says "if the url matches /baz/" then do a little work > here. That work ends up getting done twice (including, in just one instance, > saving something to the DB,

Re: Phase/URL repeat

2005-12-12 Thread Jeremy Nixon
Josh Narins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Is it breaking anything? > > A fixup handler that says "if the url matches /baz/" then do a little work > here. That work ends up getting done twice (including, in just one instance, > saving something to the DB, where I get double entries). For instanc

Re: Phase/URL repeat

2005-12-12 Thread Josh Narins
From: Jeremy Nixon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Josh Narins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I also tried /foo/bar/blah and tried this once (i.e. it tried /foo/bar, and > didn't end up trying simply /foo) Hmm, wait... you'd said that a request for /foo/bar resulted in the subrequest for /bar... is it that

Re: Phase/URL repeat

2005-12-10 Thread Jeremy Nixon
Josh Narins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I also tried /foo/bar/blah and tried this once (i.e. it tried /foo/bar, and > didn't end up trying simply /foo) Hmm, wait... you'd said that a request for /foo/bar resulted in the subrequest for /bar... is it that, or is it looking up /foo -- ie, the equi

Re: Phase/URL repeat

2005-12-10 Thread Josh Narins
From: Jeremy Nixon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Josh Narins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As you suspected, everything in the second set returns 0 for > $r->is_initial_req(). > > However, I never call internal_redirect. > > What else might be doing it? > > To make sure you are confused, the first request

Re: Phase/URL repeat

2005-12-09 Thread Jeremy Nixon
Josh Narins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As you suspected, everything in the second set returns 0 for > $r->is_initial_req(). > > However, I never call internal_redirect. > > What else might be doing it? > > To make sure you are confused, the first request returns the content, and I > have no

Re: Phase/URL repeat

2005-12-09 Thread Josh Narins
From: Jeremy Nixon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Josh Narins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > PostReadRequest /foo/bar > Trans /foo/bar > HeaderParser /foo/bar > Access /foo/bar > Fixup /foo/bar > Trans /bar > HeaderParser /bar > Access /bar > Fixup /bar > PerlHandler > > What is causing my server to resta

Re: Phase/URL repeat

2005-12-09 Thread Jeremy Nixon
Josh Narins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > PostReadRequest /foo/bar > Trans /foo/bar > HeaderParser /foo/bar > Access /foo/bar > Fixup /foo/bar > Trans /bar > HeaderParser /bar > Access /bar > Fixup /bar > PerlHandler > > What is causing my server to restart at the Trans phase with the truncated >