www.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
Message-ID: | <380417ED.D6838BA3@null.videotron.ca> |
From: | bub <bub AT null DOT videotron DOT ca> |
X-Mailer: | Mozilla 4.6 [en] (WinNT; I) |
X-Accept-Language: | en |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
Newsgroups: | comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
Subject: | Re: Question regarding CGI |
References: | <199910120447 DOT HAA08927 AT ankara DOT Foo DOT COM> |
Lines: | 30 |
Date: | Wed, 13 Oct 1999 01:26:05 -0400 |
NNTP-Posting-Host: | 24.200.83.106 |
X-Complaints-To: | abuse AT videotron DOT net |
X-Trace: | weber.videotron.net 939792141 24.200.83.106 (Wed, 13 Oct 1999 01:22:21 EDT) |
NNTP-Posting-Date: | Wed, 13 Oct 1999 01:22:21 EDT |
To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
DJ-Gateway: | from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
Reply-To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
"S. M. Halloran" wrote: > single-task system). The original poster did not actually say what development > system he was using: I had assumed he was using a system that developed Win32 > programs like RSXNTDJ rather than making a 32-bit DOS program. I was under the impression the RSXNTDJ was "experimental" and problematic, so I never bothered with it. > On systems I work with the client (browser) would just wait and wait and > possibly timeout with a confusing message when the server is requested to run a > CGI app, and then the server itself waits for something that will never come. While this would seem to make sense, if I make a perl CGI program that runs and prints nothing to stdout, I will get the same result, rather than a timeout. > I don't think I have ever seen a client or server report something like the > proper headers didn't come. Perhaps this is merely a difference in different web server's interpretation of a lack of stdout to capture. I used Windows NT's pws. Thanks everyone. - Bub
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |