[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: RewriteRule breaks slave SVN commits for 1.6.x clients only

From: Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name>
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 21:58:14 +0200

Pinzone Gerard (DS-1) wrote on Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 19:52:04 +0000:
> Designation: Non-SSA/Finmeccanica
>
> Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>
> > The Apache Subversion Project does not release binaries, official or otherwise. CollabNet, Inc. is > one of several third parties who build and release binaries of our software.
>
> Just letting everyone know what binaries I was using incase this
> behavior is unique to their configuration.
>

Sure, knowing exactly what build you used is relevant information.

It's just the adjective "official" that caught my eye.

> >> The problem was due to a RewriteRule on the master and/or slave:
> >>
> >> # Redirect to remove double slash within URL-path RewriteCond
> >> %{REQUEST_URI} ^(.*)//+(.*)$ RewriteRule .*
> >> https://%{SERVER_NAME}%1/%2 [R=301,L]
> >>
> >> ...
> >>
> >> I don't mind removing this RewriteRule from the configuration file,
> >
> > Seems like that's a solution then.
>
> That's a solution much like cutting off a finger to get rid of a splinter. Yeah it works, but...
>

Disagree. Your description was that you added the RewriteRule to solve
an alleged problem; I just told you that the alleged problem isn't
a problem.

> > (And, by the way, your RewriteRule is less than ideal; it causes a
> > repeated request for each doubled slash: http://foo/bar/////baz)
>
> How so? I thought the plus sign after the second slash will capture one or more slashes? Could you provide a revised expression?
>

You're right, but consider: http://host/foo//bar//baz

> >> but I'm still wondering why this breaks ONLY slave commits and ONLY
> >> on older clients?
> >
> > Don't know. You haven't said what version the master server runs, though.
>
> I stated that this started happening "when I upgraded from the latest
> 1.6.x server to the 1.7.1" one. Both master and slave servers were
> upgraded simultaneously.

You didn't mention this, AFAIK.

(And, BTW, master's version should always be ≥ slave's version.)

> In fact, they're now at 1.7.2, but the issue persists.
>
> 3.1.1001
Received on 2011-12-20 21:00:09 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.