Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 15962
redirect.apm should accept relative urls
Last modified: 2007-04-18 12:28:08 EDT
redirect.apm requires full urls:
This makes testing difficult, and I guarantees you that I will accidentally
push files containing links to sassy.
can you have a look at this script.
I suggest using localhost as a hostname and resetting this to the name of the
FIxed this. The script will now use the SERVER_NAME environment variable to
determine where relative links should go. For the time being it is assumed that
all relative links use the http protocol ( as opposed to ftp gopher, mailto ).
Mmmm. Can't seem to get this to work - it's just redirecting to home page. Maybe
I'm using the wrong syntax? Can I have the *exact* string to use for the url?
I think some confusion resulted from the comments posted above.
Here's the syntax for doing a relative link:
<A HREF="/apps/redirect.apm/apps/response/myform.html">My Form</A>
This code will redirect you to /apps/response/myform.html on whatever server you
happen to be using.
If you want to tack parameters on the end, that's the same as before.
I think the problem may be that this is a drop-down form. That's why we need to
redirect mod - so that you can choose a page from the drop-down field. The form
<FORM NAME="selecter1" ACTION="/apps/redirect.apm" METHOD="GET">
I've tried both
but both just take me to the home page.
You're right. That was an oversight. I didn't see the difference between rhpage
I've committed the new version. I'll push it live in a minute. Your code example
wouldn't work anyway, though.
You need the following:
THe important bit being the select name of rhpath. This is what the script is
Well, it's mostly working. It doesn't check for port numbers, though. In order
to really test it in my sandbox, it would be nice if the correct port number
could be passed through.
Actually, it's not working at all. Doesn't work on y2k either. I don't have any
idea why. Can we please reopen this bug? This needs to work so that we can push
the training section liv
It hadn't been pushed to y2k, hence wasn't working.
Now accepts non-standard ports, too.