The reason that we want to move from ?filename.cgi configuration is that it
looks better and acts more easily to define the type of work being created,
managed or edited. Not that it's not okay to use that, just preferences.
Kimi
At 7/10/02, you wrote:
>On Jul 10, 10:52am, Kimi A. Adams wrote:
>
> > I am not sure if this is the appropriate way to ask this. So, we are
> doing
> > something like this for the
> > URL: www.unitywave.com/testm.cgi?post/username/filename.html But we
> > would like it to look like
> > this: www.unitywave.com/testm/post/username/filename.html In trying to
> > run this from the server: perl testm.cgi, it works. It also works when
> > you move testm.cgi to testm and run the same command using just
> testm. But
> > when we go to the website, using that testm instead of the .cgi? it shows
> > the program rather than the output like it does on the server.
> >
> > We want to do this so that a path is shown to the customer, rather than
> the
> > extensions and characters. However, I am at a draw as to whether this is
> > httpd.conf that controls this or if it's the program that is running, i.e.
> > perl or cgi.
>
>You'll need to tweak the web server configuration file (httpd.conf or
>the like).
>
>BTW, what's wrong with something like:
>
> www.unitywave.com/testm.cgi/post/username/filename.html
> ^^^^
>
>?
>
>Kevin
>________________________________________________
>See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't
>post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
>
>PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
>http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)