Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Apr 21, 2023. It is now read-only.

Different 404 for .pagespeed resources #485

Closed
GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue Apr 6, 2015 · 8 comments
Closed

Different 404 for .pagespeed resources #485

GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue Apr 6, 2015 · 8 comments
Labels
auto-migrated Priority-Low Type-Enhancement

Comments

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link 

What steps will reproduce the problem?
1. Load http://www.jefftk.com/this-does-not-exist.png.pagespeed.ce.HASH.png
2. Compare to 
http://www.jefftk.com/this-does-not-exist.png.pagespeed.cFAKEe.HASH.png or 
http://www.jefftk.com/this-does-not-exist.png

What is the expected output? What do you see instead?

The normal Apache 404 is:

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN">
<html><head>
<title>404 Not Found</title>
</head><body>
<h1>Not Found</h1>
<p>The requested URL /this-does-not-exist.png was not found on this server.</p>
<hr>
<address>Apache/2.2.14 (Ubuntu) Server at www.jefftk.com Port 80</address>
</body></html>

For valid .pagespeed paths to non-existent resources we get (linebreaks added):

<html><head><title>Not Found</title></head>
<body><h1>Apache server with mod_pagespeed</h1>OK<hr>NOT 
FOUND:http://www.jefftk.com/this-does-not-exist.png.pagespeed.ce.HASH.png</body>
</html>

Original issue reported on code.google.com by jefftk@google.com on 8 Aug 2012 at 2:06
@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author 

This may mean we wouldn't respect custom 404s.

Original comment by jefftk@google.com on 8 Aug 2012 at 2:07

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author 

I don't know how important that is, but this line:
ap_rputs("<body><h1>Apache server with mod_pagespeed</h1>OK", request);
... should probably lose the 'OK'.

Original comment by morlov...@google.com on 8 Aug 2012 at 3:21

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author 

Yeah, we are just sending our own 404 message. I don't expect this should come 
up much though (given that only mps should create .pagespeed. resources). But 
the message should probably be improved if nothing else. The normal Apache 404 
message seems like a good model to follow. We might add something about 
mod_pagespeed handling the resource.

Original comment by sligocki@google.com on 8 Aug 2012 at 3:30

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author 

Is there a reason not to fall back on apache's 404 handling?

Original comment by jefftk@google.com on 8 Aug 2012 at 3:44

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author 

Might be more difficult to do correctly? But if it's easy, that sounds ideal.

Original comment by sligocki@google.com on 8 Aug 2012 at 5:00

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

Original comment by jefftk@google.com on 14 Dec 2012 at 6:28

  • Added labels: Priority-Low
  • Removed labels: Priority-Medium

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

Original comment by jmara...@google.com on 23 Sep 2013 at 6:40

  • Added labels: Type-Enhancement
  • Removed labels: Type-Defect

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author 

This was fixed sometime ago.

Original comment by jmara...@google.com on 18 Sep 2014 at 6:01

  • Changed state: Fixed

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
auto-migrated Priority-Low Type-Enhancement
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@GoogleCodeExporter