Re: Code updates

On November 16, 2002 04:29 am, Miles Elam wrote:
> Mark Swanson wrote:
> In the future, if TUX supports any type of client detection, a "Vary:
> User-Agent" will have to be sent as well.  If this functionality is
> handled by the implementation, they can be effectively  processed and
> concatenated without user head-scratching;  The user would only have to
> worry about the end result and not the means to get there.

Good point.

> Is there an established location for code updates or is this list the
> "repository" until Ingo returns?  I'd hate for someone to waste time
> trying to re-fix this bug.

No. Any volunteers to create an unofficial Tux patch page?

> >Last thought: If squid _ever_ caches a response with no Vary it will not
> >replace it with a new response containing Vary - nor obey the Vary
> > semantics. So, perhaps it is simply better to always enable Vary: so this
> > confusing scenario can never occur.
>
> Which means that my last patch was incorrect -- It should always be
> sending a "Vary" header or else it is no better than its absence
> altogether.  As for Squid's dismissal of "Vary" if a previous request is
> not "Vary"ed, that sounds to me like a Squid bug.

I agree - I think the Vary: header must always be sent.



-- 
Schedule your world with ScheduleWorld.com
http://www.ScheduleWorld.com/