This is a weird problem, but perhaps someone else has seen it before
(I hope!)
If I use a fully qualified include call
include ( 'http://localhost/subtree/filename.php')
I get an 'undefined function' error when calling a routine that's
defined in that file.
(I know the file is being included and the parser is at least seeing
the definition because I put disclosure echos before and after the
definition, and the echos work.)
But the error goes away and the function executes if I use a relative
reference
include ('subtree/filename.php')
even though subtree is *not* declared in the include_path config var
in php.ini.
Thanks in advance for any ideas. I'm stumped!
-Puzzled in Rainy Massachusetts 6 1881
Puzzled said the following on 18/10/2005 17:54: This is a weird problem, but perhaps someone else has seen it before (I hope!)
If I use a fully qualified include call
include ( 'http://localhost/subtree/filename.php')
I get an 'undefined function' error when calling a routine that's defined in that file.
AAARGH! This question comes up practically every week!
This is an absolute *HTTP* URL, not an absolute *filesystem* URL. So it
obtains filename.php by performing an HTTP request to the specified
server, which just happens to be "localhost" in this case.
And of course, a server set up to parse and execute PHP files will parse
and execute filename.php when it's requested, so all your include() call
sees is the output result of filename.php.
--
Oli
Oli Filth wrote: Puzzled said the following on 18/10/2005 17:54: This is a weird problem, but perhaps someone else has seen it before (I hope!)
If I use a fully qualified include call
include ( 'http://localhost/subtree/filename.php')
I get an 'undefined function' error when calling a routine that's defined in that file.
AAARGH! This question comes up practically every week!
This is an absolute *HTTP* URL, not an absolute *filesystem* URL. So it obtains filename.php by performing an HTTP request to the specified server, which just happens to be "localhost" in this case.
And of course, a server set up to parse and execute PHP files will parse and execute filename.php when it's requested, so all your include() call sees is the output result of filename.php.
Thanks much for your quick reply.
I think I must be missing something important still, because I don't
understand what you said. Check me on this, would you?
A URL is just another filesystem reference, but using a highly
generalized syntax that's independent of o/s and physical
location--like NFS, but more general. So any processing that would
be done or not done to a file would be independent of the type of
reference used to retrieve it.
When the php interpreter knows it's operating on an include file, it
should know enough not to start a new symbol table, but instead add
things like function definitions to the existing symbol table it
started building when it read up the outermost file.
But that doesn't appear to be what's happening. It looks to me as
though it's treating the .php extension as being more important than
the fact the file is being included, so instead of continuing the same
symbol table, it's building a special one for that file and then
discarding it.
Is that what's causing the problem, the fact that I'm using a .php
extension on the include file?
That would make a crazy sort of sense, since the php interpreter would
do its own filesystem fetches, but might hand any url reference, even
one for an include, off to Apache to satisfy. And somewhere in that
process, the fact that it's just an include file is getting pushed and
the file is being interpreted as though it were a completely new job.
Whereas if it had some .inc or .foo extension, Apache wouldn't try to
pass it through the interpreter, but would just hand it over.
still Puzzled, but struggling
--
(To mail me, please change .not.invalid to .net, first.
Apologies for the inconvenience.)
Puzzled wrote: Oli Filth wrote:
Puzzled said the following on 18/10/2005 17:54: If I use a fully qualified include call
include ( 'http://localhost/subtree/filename.php')
I get an 'undefined function' error when calling a routine that's defined in that file. This is an absolute *HTTP* URL, not an absolute *filesystem* URL. So it obtains filename.php by performing an HTTP request to the specified server, which just happens to be "localhost" in this case.
And of course, a server set up to parse and execute PHP files will parse and execute filename.php when it's requested, so all your include() call sees is the output result of filename.php.
I think I must be missing something important still, because I don't understand what you said. Check me on this, would you?
A URL is just another filesystem reference, but using a highly generalized syntax that's independent of o/s and physical location--like NFS, but more general. So any processing that would be done or not done to a file would be independent of the type of reference used to retrieve it.
In this case, not really, because the URL is prefixed with "http://",
which specifies "Go and get this resource using the HTTP protocol".
The fact is that you're requesting "filename.php" via HTTP. PHP doesn't
know that you're expecting it to implicitly convert
"http://localhost/..." to a local filesystem reference, so it simply
sends out an HTTP request for that file, just as if you'd typed
"http://localhost/.../filename.php" into your browser.
The request just so happens to be to your own server, which serves this
request by processing filename.php spitting the output back as the HTTP
response. This HTTP response is then included into the original PHP
file.
When the php interpreter knows it's operating on an include file, it should know enough not to start a new symbol table, but instead add things like function definitions to the existing symbol table it started building when it read up the outermost file.
This is impossible, because filename.php is processed in a completely
separate instance to the original PHP file, serving an entirely
separate HTTP request.
Is that what's causing the problem, the fact that I'm using a .php extension on the include file?
That would make a crazy sort of sense, since the php interpreter would do its own filesystem fetches, but might hand any url reference, even one for an include, off to Apache to satisfy. And somewhere in that process, the fact that it's just an include file is getting pushed and the file is being interpreted as though it were a completely new job. Whereas if it had some .inc or .foo extension, Apache wouldn't try to pass it through the interpreter, but would just hand it over.
Yup, that's the explanation in a nutshell (except that the first PHP
instance doesn't request filename.php directly from Apache, it does it
via an HTTP request which lands at Apache indirectly).
The simplest solution would be to not include() local files via HTTP.
Even if you renamed your include files to .inc extensions, this would
be insecure, since anyone could request them via HTTP and view your
source code.
--
Oli
Puzzled wrote: This is a weird problem, but perhaps someone else has seen it before (I hope!)
If I use a fully qualified include call
include ( 'http://localhost/subtree/filename.php')
I get an 'undefined function' error when calling a routine that's defined in that file.
(I know the file is being included and the parser is at least seeing the definition because I put disclosure echos before and after the definition, and the echos work.)
But the error goes away and the function executes if I use a relative reference
include ('subtree/filename.php')
even though subtree is *not* declared in the include_path config var in php.ini.
if the subtree folder is in the same folder as the current script, php
knows to look for that folder in the current folder. same as include
'filename.php', it looks in the current folder.
if you are looking to include a file relative to the main folder of
your site, try
include $_SERVER['DOCUMENT_ROOT'].'subtree/filename.php'
(you may need a slash before subtree)
--
juglesh
Oli Filth wrote: Puzzled wrote: Oli Filth wrote:
>Puzzled said the following on 18/10/2005 17:54: >> If I use a fully qualified include call >> >> include ( 'http://localhost/subtree/filename.php') >> >> I get an 'undefined function' error when calling a routine that's >> defined in that file. > >This is an absolute *HTTP* URL, not an absolute *filesystem* URL. So it >obtains filename.php by performing an HTTP request to the specified >server, which just happens to be "localhost" in this case. > >And of course, a server set up to parse and execute PHP files will parse >and execute filename.php when it's requested, so all your include() call >sees is the output result of filename.php.
I think I must be missing something important still, because I don't understand what you said. Check me on this, would you?
A URL is just another filesystem reference, but using a highly generalized syntax that's independent of o/s and physical location--like NFS, but more general. So any processing that would be done or not done to a file would be independent of the type of reference used to retrieve it.
In this case, not really, because the URL is prefixed with "http://", which specifies "Go and get this resource using the HTTP protocol".
The fact is that you're requesting "filename.php" via HTTP. PHP doesn't know that you're expecting it to implicitly convert "http://localhost/..." to a local filesystem reference, so it simply sends out an HTTP request for that file, just as if you'd typed "http://localhost/.../filename.php" into your browser.
The request just so happens to be to your own server, which serves this request by processing filename.php spitting the output back as the HTTP response. This HTTP response is then included into the original PHP file.
When the php interpreter knows it's operating on an include file, it should know enough not to start a new symbol table, but instead add things like function definitions to the existing symbol table it started building when it read up the outermost file.
This is impossible, because filename.php is processed in a completely separate instance to the original PHP file, serving an entirely separate HTTP request.
Is that what's causing the problem, the fact that I'm using a .php extension on the include file?
That would make a crazy sort of sense, since the php interpreter would do its own filesystem fetches, but might hand any url reference, even one for an include, off to Apache to satisfy. And somewhere in that process, the fact that it's just an include file is getting pushed and the file is being interpreted as though it were a completely new job. Whereas if it had some .inc or .foo extension, Apache wouldn't try to pass it through the interpreter, but would just hand it over.
Yup, that's the explanation in a nutshell (except that the first PHP instance doesn't request filename.php directly from Apache, it does it via an HTTP request which lands at Apache indirectly).
The simplest solution would be to not include() local files via HTTP.
Even if you renamed your include files to .inc extensions, this would be insecure, since anyone could request them via HTTP and view your source code.
Again thanks for another prompt response (more prompt than mine, since
everyone's having phone problems around here due to rain)
So it sounds as though there's no really good, general solution.
Either I use an extension that doesn't trigger interpretation, and
suffer code-snooping, or I keep duplicate copies on each server and
load using relative refs. *sigh*
Many thanks for the deconfusion!
- less-Puzzled-now
Puzzled wrote: Oli Filth wrote:
Puzzled wrote:
Oli Filth wrote:
Puzzled said the following on 18/10/2005 17:54:
>If I use a fully qualified include call > > include ( 'http://localhost/subtree/filename.php') > >I get an 'undefined function' error when calling a routine that's >defined in that file.
This is an absolute *HTTP* URL, not an absolute *filesystem* URL. So it obtains filename.php by performing an HTTP request to the specified server, which just happens to be "localhost" in this case.
And of course, a server set up to parse and execute PHP files will parse and execute filename.php when it's requested, so all your include() call sees is the output result of filename.php.
I think I must be missing something important still, because I don't understand what you said. Check me on this, would you?
A URL is just another filesystem reference, but using a highly generalized syntax that's independent of o/s and physical location--like NFS, but more general. So any processing that would be done or not done to a file would be independent of the type of reference used to retrieve it.
In this case, not really, because the URL is prefixed with "http://", which specifies "Go and get this resource using the HTTP protocol".
The fact is that you're requesting "filename.php" via HTTP. PHP doesn't know that you're expecting it to implicitly convert "http://localhost/..." to a local filesystem reference, so it simply sends out an HTTP request for that file, just as if you'd typed "http://localhost/.../filename.php" into your browser.
The request just so happens to be to your own server, which serves this request by processing filename.php spitting the output back as the HTTP response. This HTTP response is then included into the original PHP file.
When the php interpreter knows it's operating on an include file, it should know enough not to start a new symbol table, but instead add things like function definitions to the existing symbol table it started building when it read up the outermost file.
This is impossible, because filename.php is processed in a completely separate instance to the original PHP file, serving an entirely separate HTTP request.
Is that what's causing the problem, the fact that I'm using a .php extension on the include file?
That would make a crazy sort of sense, since the php interpreter would do its own filesystem fetches, but might hand any url reference, even one for an include, off to Apache to satisfy. And somewhere in that process, the fact that it's just an include file is getting pushed and the file is being interpreted as though it were a completely new job. Whereas if it had some .inc or .foo extension, Apache wouldn't try to pass it through the interpreter, but would just hand it over.
Yup, that's the explanation in a nutshell (except that the first PHP instance doesn't request filename.php directly from Apache, it does it via an HTTP request which lands at Apache indirectly).
The simplest solution would be to not include() local files via HTTP.
Even if you renamed your include files to .inc extensions, this would be insecure, since anyone could request them via HTTP and view your source code.
Again thanks for another prompt response (more prompt than mine, since everyone's having phone problems around here due to rain)
So it sounds as though there's no really good, general solution. Either I use an extension that doesn't trigger interpretation, and suffer code-snooping, or I keep duplicate copies on each server and load using relative refs. *sigh*
Many thanks for the deconfusion!
- less-Puzzled-now
PMJI, but I think you're better having duplicate copies of your code on
each server.
For instance - what happens if the server holding the (single) copy of
your code goes down? It does happen! :-) None of the other servers would
be able to access the code - and all would effectively be down.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp. js*******@attglobal.net
================== This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. Similar topics
by: Dan Finn |
last post by:
OpenBSD 3.2
Apache 1.3.26
PHP 4.3.4
PHP-Nuke 6.9
getting these in the apache error log:
Sun Nov 16 20:20:16 2003] PHP Notice: Undefined variable:
HTTP_USER_AGENT in...
|
by: RU |
last post by:
Hi,
I am working on a porting project to port C/C++ application from
unixware C++, AT&T Standard components to g++ with STL on Linux. This
application has been working properly on...
|
by: Reza Roby |
last post by:
The following code reports a runtime error "v has no properties."
function ff()
{
var v;
v.x=5; //error
alert(v.x);
}
But this one alerts "undefined":
|
by: David N |
last post by:
Hi All,
What is a best way to handle an undefined value object class that returned
from a function. I have a function that call the ADO.NET ExecuteScalar()
function and returns the object to...
|
by: r.nikhilk |
last post by:
Hi,
We are porting C++ applications from 32 bit to 64 bit on AIX platform.
(The current version of AIX is 5.3 and xlC verison is 8.0). We are able
to compile the applications by including the...
|
by: matty |
last post by:
Hi,
I recently got very confused (well that's my life) about the
"undefined" value. I looked in the FAQ and didn't see anything about
it. On...
|
by: Chad |
last post by:
The input file is:
Params
1
2
3
4
5
6,7
Data
1,1
|
by: VK |
last post by:
(see the post by ASM in the original thread; can be seen at
<http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/browse_frm/thread/3716384d8bfa1b0b>
as an option)
As that is not in relevance to...
|
by: prakash.mirji |
last post by:
Hello,
I am getting below mention linker error when I tried to link my class
test.C
I use below command to compile test.C
/usr/bin/g++ -g -fpic -fvisibility=default -D_POSIX_SOURCE...
|
by: jl_post |
last post by:
Hi,
I've heard that if you've declared a variable (such as a double or
an int) and not initialize it, then the result of printing out its
value is undefined.
I've also heard that "undefined...
|
by: CloudSolutions |
last post by:
Introduction:
For many beginners and individual users, requiring a credit card and email registration may pose a barrier when starting to use cloud servers. However, some cloud server providers now...
|
by: isladogs |
last post by:
The next Access Europe User Group meeting will be on Wednesday 3 Apr 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC+1) and finishing by 19:30 (7.30PM).
In this session, we are pleased to welcome former...
|
by: ryjfgjl |
last post by:
In our work, we often need to import Excel data into databases (such as MySQL, SQL Server, Oracle) for data analysis and processing. Usually, we use database tools like Navicat or the Excel import...
|
by: taylorcarr |
last post by:
A Canon printer is a smart device known for being advanced, efficient, and reliable. It is designed for home, office, and hybrid workspace use and can also be used for a variety of purposes. However,...
|
by: Charles Arthur |
last post by:
How do i turn on java script on a villaon, callus and itel keypad mobile phone
|
by: ryjfgjl |
last post by:
In our work, we often receive Excel tables with data in the same format. If we want to analyze these data, it can be difficult to analyze them because the data is spread across multiple Excel files...
|
by: emmanuelkatto |
last post by:
Hi All, I am Emmanuel katto from Uganda. I want to ask what challenges you've faced while migrating a website to cloud.
Please let me know.
Thanks!
Emmanuel
|
by: nemocccc |
last post by:
hello, everyone, I want to develop a software for my android phone for daily needs, any suggestions?
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
There are some requirements for setting up RAID:
1. The motherboard and BIOS support RAID configuration.
2. The motherboard has 2 or more available SATA protocol SSD/HDD slots (including MSATA, M.2...
| |