On 30 Jan 2019, at 05:27, Jeffry Killen <jekillen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Jan 29, 2019, at 8:46 PM, Sam Hobbs <Sam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Jeffry Killen wrote on 1/29/2019 8:35 PM:
>>> The ''situation" is when a hard link name without a .php suffix is to
>>> a php script file that is recognized by .php suffix.
>>>
>> Recognized how? What is to be done with it? When you say "is recognized by
>> .php suffix" do you mean that the file having a php suffix is to be processed
>> as a PHP file? Do you want that to happen for all files having a php suffix?
>>
>> The original question said "the php source code was displayed". Is that what
>> you want to happen or not happen? The relevance of the php source code being
>> displayed is not clear.
>
> Will a link to a php source code file that is named without a php suffix be
> considered and run as a php source code file?
Not unless the you tell apache, via the appropriate config file, to treat its extension (if it has one) in the same way as a file with a php suffix.
A file containing php is just a text file. It seems to me that those who live by the suffix and now dying by the suffix, although without a proper cross-platform system of file metadata I'm not sure how that can be avoided.
--
Cheers -- Tim
