From 71974c24bbd31e4295b366eeea245131e8a9dc21 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "https://www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawlqWSY9PNYRysA9vrU-JiQh7-s7q6SOcIE" Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 09:32:03 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] Chatter --- doc/bugs/Running_on_an_alternative_port_fails.mdwn | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) diff --git a/doc/bugs/Running_on_an_alternative_port_fails.mdwn b/doc/bugs/Running_on_an_alternative_port_fails.mdwn index 006c27232..942700ba3 100644 --- a/doc/bugs/Running_on_an_alternative_port_fails.mdwn +++ b/doc/bugs/Running_on_an_alternative_port_fails.mdwn @@ -81,5 +81,13 @@ index 73689be..039b7e3 100644 -- fergus +--- + I've gone ahead and filed a bug on CGI.pm too: --[[Joey]] + +--- + +That'll be an interesting discussion as I'd suggest that HTTP_ headers are defined in the CGI specification as client headers and thus what `thttpd` is doing is wrong (i.e. mangling the client's own representation). Whether a CGI client should trust HTTP_ header over the server is probably already settled by convention. + +-- fergus -- 2.39.5