[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Bug-wget] wget - cntlm incompatibility (wget 1.13 onwards)

From: Giuseppe Scrivano
Subject: Re: [Bug-wget] wget - cntlm incompatibility (wget 1.13 onwards)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 12:26:00 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux)

Darshit Shah <address@hidden> writes:

>> In wget-1.13 if I replace the two request_set_header calls in http.c
>> (line 1683,1684) with one
>> for "Connection" "Keep-Alive" then the download is successful:
>>   if (inhibit_keep_alive)
>>     request_set_header (req, "Connection", "Close", rel_none);
>>   else
>>     {
>>       if (proxy == NULL)
>>         request_set_header (req, "Connection", "Keep-Alive", rel_none);
>>       else
>>         {
>>           //request_set_header (req, "Connection", "Close", rel_none);
>>           //request_set_header (req, "Proxy-Connection", "Keep-Alive",
>> rel_none);
>>           request_set_header (req, "Connection", "Keep-Alive",
>> rel_none);
>>         }
>>     }
>> I don't know whether this is rather a wget or an cntlm issue. I will
>> post this to the cntlm mailing list as well.
>> Any help is appreciated (it would be nice if we don't need to patch wget
>> in future ...).
> Hi Thorsten,
> Sorry for the delay in responding and thanks for reporting this to us.
> This does indeed look like a bug to me. When inhibit_keep_alive is not
> set, Wget should indeed be sending a Connection: Keep-Alive header and
> not close the connection. Unless there is some specification about
> working with proxies that I forget.
> I think this is a bug and needs to be fixed with the above provided
> solution. Does anyone here object?

>From the ChangeLog file, it seems that Proxy-Connection was introduced
to fix a problem with some HTTP/1.0 proxies.

Thorsten, does it work if we leave both headers set like the following?

request_set_header (req, "Connection", "Keep-Alive", rel_none);
request_set_header (req, "Proxy-Connection", "Keep-Alive", rel_none);


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]