Re: Apache2 SAPI behaviour regarding PATH_TRANSLATED

Ilia A. wrote:

On May 17, 2003 05:26 pm, Shane Caraveo wrote:

It is inconsistent to set PATH_TRANSLATED to different things depending on whether real PATH_INFO is used or not. This inconsistency makes PATH_TRANSLATED unreliable. Apache is doing the right thing, why should PHP go and mess that up?

A valid point, however we have a big Apache 1 userbase who are used to the old behavior. Why must we alienate them and break their scripts if they are forced to switch to Apache 2? There is little or nothing that we lose from maintaining the old behavior, even though it may not entirely correct. Ilia

Well, it matters little if you do not use PATH_INFO, it can matter a lot if you do, but it still matters irregardless. You could also consider it a possible hole if your script depends on PATH_TRANSLATED being the same as SCRIPT_FILENAME, and you use it as such. A contrived example would be using the dirname of PATH_TRANLSATED to include some script. Just adding path_info to the url would break their script. It also matters a lot from understanding the protocol and documentation standpoints and reducing WTF. I'm not saying don't put it in, I'm saying make it configurable, and for PHP5, make the 'correct' way the default configuration. This way people can still run scripts that depend on the old behaviour, but we can start to ween people away from incorrect usage of this stuff. Shane