.htaccess patch for 404 of Non-drupal files
It is worth including the change in this page http://drupal.org/node/56773 to the standard .htaccess we distribute? This has two advantages: a) Avoid a Drupal bootstrap for every 404 of these files. b) Send a smaller number of bytes when this happen. I believe the majority of sites would not want Drupal to handle 404 for these files. I can make the patch if it has a chance of getting through.
Khalid B wrote:
It is worth including the change in this page http://drupal.org/node/56773 to the standard .htaccess we distribute?
This has two advantages:
a) Avoid a Drupal bootstrap for every 404 of these files. b) Send a smaller number of bytes when this happen.
I believe the majority of sites would not want Drupal to handle 404 for these files.
I can make the patch if it has a chance of getting through.
yes, i would like to see this. if people really object, we could default to commented out.
Go ahead and +1 it then ... On 8/2/06, Moshe Weitzman <weitzman@tejasa.com> wrote:
Khalid B wrote:
It is worth including the change in this page http://drupal.org/node/56773 to the standard .htaccess we distribute?
This has two advantages:
a) Avoid a Drupal bootstrap for every 404 of these files. b) Send a smaller number of bytes when this happen.
I believe the majority of sites would not want Drupal to handle 404 for these files.
I can make the patch if it has a chance of getting through.
yes, i would like to see this. if people really object, we could default to commented out.
That's a good addition. +1 from me. 2006/8/3, Khalid B <kb@2bits.com>:
Go ahead and +1 it then ...
On 8/2/06, Moshe Weitzman <weitzman@tejasa.com> wrote:
Khalid B wrote:
It is worth including the change in this page http://drupal.org/node/56773 to the standard .htaccess we distribute?
This has two advantages:
a) Avoid a Drupal bootstrap for every 404 of these files. b) Send a smaller number of bytes when this happen.
I believe the majority of sites would not want Drupal to handle 404 for these files.
I can make the patch if it has a chance of getting through.
yes, i would like to see this. if people really object, we could default to commented out.
On 8/3/06, Khalid B <kb@2bits.com> wrote:
It is worth including the change in this page http://drupal.org/node/56773 to the standard .htaccess we distribute?
+1, but note that it blocks the fake phantom call for the clean urls, so we need to fix that before it goes in :)
I could not find any reference in current HEAD to /system/test/. The information seems outdated. 2006/8/3, Breyten Ernsting <breyten@gmail.com>:
On 8/3/06, Khalid B <kb@2bits.com> wrote:
It is worth including the change in this page http://drupal.org/node/56773 to the standard .htaccess we distribute?
+1, but note that it blocks the fake phantom call for the clean urls, so we need to fix that before it goes in :)
On 8/3/06, Konstantin Käfer <mail@kkaefer.com> wrote:
I could not find any reference in current HEAD to /system/test/. The information seems outdated.
Yup, that information is outdated indeed. The test currently just links to the clean url of the settings page. My bad :) Grtz, Breyten :-)
participants (4)
-
Breyten Ernsting -
Khalid B -
Konstantin Käfer -
Moshe Weitzman