Bug report #4799

QGIS Server - GetMap URI inconsistency

Added by Andy Harfoot over 12 years ago. Updated over 9 years ago.

Assignee:Marco Hugentobler
Category:QGIS Server
Affected QGIS version:master Regression?:No
Operating System: Easy fix?:No
Pull Request or Patch supplied:No Resolution:fixed/implemented
Crashes QGIS or corrupts data:No Copied to github as #:14651


Using the OSGeo4W package installer on Windows7 64bit I installed QGIS Server 1.7.3-1, Apache 2.2.14-4 and associated dependencies including fcgi. I created a demo project in QGIS Desktop 1.7.3-1 and successfully returned a GetCapabilities document in my web browser.

The next step was to try to access the QGIS server WMS in various GIS packages (QGIS, MapInfo and ArcGIS). In all cases the software was able to parse the GetCapabilities document, however I could not view the data. Generating a GetMap request in my web browser did return a map image though. Eventually I got a WMS layer to display in QGIS Desktop by enabling the 'Ignore GetMap URI reported in capabilities' option in the WMS connection setup dialog.

The same problem is reported here:
and here:

As reported in the second thread above, the problem appears to stem from the fact that the GetCapabilities document reports the GetMap link omitting the http: prefix. An excerpt from my test GetCapabilities document is shown below:

<HTTP GetCapabilities="http://localhost/qgis/qgis_mapserv.fcgi.exe?map=C:/temp/ArealApportionment/Working.qgs" 
  GetMap="//localhost/qgis/qgis_mapserv.fcgi.exe?map=C:/temp/ArealApportionment/Working.qgs&amp;" />

I believe this is a bug, and is restricting the functionality of what would otherwise be a very quick way to set up a WMS service.


#1 Updated by Paolo Cavallini over 11 years ago

  • Target version set to Version 2.0.0

#2 Updated by René-Luc ReLuc almost 11 years ago

  • Assignee set to Marco Hugentobler

Hi Marco,

I think this bug has been fixed. Can you closed it ?


#3 Updated by René-Luc ReLuc over 10 years ago

I think this issues can be closed, isn't it ?

#4 Updated by René-Luc ReLuc almost 10 years ago

Marco, can we close this issue ?

#5 Updated by Giovanni Manghi almost 10 years ago

  • Status changed from Open to Feedback

#6 Updated by Jürgen Fischer almost 10 years ago

  • Target version changed from Version 2.0.0 to Future Release - Lower Priority

#7 Updated by Giovanni Manghi over 9 years ago

  • Resolution set to fixed/implemented
  • Status changed from Feedback to Closed

Also available in: Atom PDF