Item1465: Reset password fails on branches
Priority: Urgent
Current State: Closed
Released In: 1.0.5
Target Release: patch
Applies To: Engine
Component: resetPassword
Branches:
Passwords.pm is not in the UI directory
Can't locate Foswiki/UI/Passwords.pm in @INC (@INC contains: /var/www/SVN/foswiki/branches/Release01x00/core/lib . /etc/perl /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/i686-linux-thread-multi /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8 /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.8/i686-linux-thread-multi /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.8 /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/i686-linux-thread-multi /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8 /usr/local/lib/site_perl /var/www/SVN/foswiki/branches/Release01x00/core/lib/CPAN/lib//arch /var/www/SVN/foswiki/branches/Release01x00/core/lib/CPAN/lib//5.8.8/i686-linux-thread-multi /var/www/SVN/foswiki/branches/Release01x00/core/lib/CPAN/lib//5.8.8 /var/www/SVN/foswiki/branches/Release01x00/core/lib/CPAN/lib/) at (eval 13) line 2.
at (eval 13) line 2
Foswiki::UI::BEGIN() called at Foswiki/UI/Passwords.pm line 2
eval {...} called at Foswiki/UI/Passwords.pm line 2
eval 'use Foswiki::UI::Passwords
;' called at /var/www/SVN/foswiki/branches/Release01x00/core/lib/Foswiki/UI.pm line 199
Foswiki::UI::handleRequest('Foswiki::Request=HASH(0x876557c)') called at /var/www/SVN/foswiki/branches/Release01x00/core/lib/Foswiki/Engine/CGI.pm line 26
Foswiki::Engine::CGI::run('Foswiki::Engine::CGI=HASH(0x8626378)') called at resetpasswd line 45
BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at (eval 13) line 2.
at (eval 13) line 2
eval 'use Foswiki::UI::Passwords
;' called at /var/www/SVN/foswiki/branches/Release01x00/core/lib/Foswiki/UI.pm line 199
Foswiki::UI::handleRequest('Foswiki::Request=HASH(0x876557c)') called at /var/www/SVN/foswiki/branches/Release01x00/core/lib/Foswiki/Engine/CGI.pm line 26
Foswiki::Engine::CGI::run('Foswiki::Engine::CGI=HASH(0x8626378)') called at resetpasswd line 45
--
GeorgeClark
The merge from trunk happened without remembering that some of the code has moved place.
Fixed and confirmed that we still reject GET
--
KennethLavrsen - 19 Apr 2009