[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [libmicrohttpd] Real Windows support?
From: |
LRN |
Subject: |
Re: [libmicrohttpd] Real Windows support? |
Date: |
Wed, 23 Oct 2013 22:03:52 +0400 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:27.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/27.0a1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 23.10.2013 21:50, Nils Durner wrote:
> Am 23.10.2013 um 19:31 schrieb Christian Grothoff wrote:
>> On 10/16/2013 05:50 PM, Luke-Jr wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 1:19:09 PM Evgeny Grin wrote:
>>>> Win32 sockets itself are mostly compatible.
>>>> But 'select' on win32 can be used only on sockets, while MHD use it for
>>>> pipes too,
>>>
>>> I use sockets in place of pipes to workaround this:
>>> http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/bfgminer.git/tree/util.c#n2626
>>>
>>
>> This does sound reasonable to me, and if that approach allows us to
>> get rid of plibc and make everyone happy, I'm fine with it. However,
>> I won't do this myself as I don't do W32 development and thus could
>> not reasonably test this. I would also ask that any patch provided
>> to do this should be run by LRN and/or Nils just to make sure we don't
>> have unexpected regressions.
>>
>
> as the PlibC implementation of select() does more than just interleave
> between Windows' select() and pipe polling, I don't see how "getting
> rid of plibc" would actually make sense (other than to please the
> masses ;-)).
> OTOH, using a socket instead of a pipe does make sense (because
> aforementioned interleaving would not take place anymore). I had
> planned to hack on this (and 64-bit safety as pointed out by Evgeny)
> already, but Ubuntu distupgrade mayhem got in my way.
I don't know how to break it out to you...but libmicrohttpd does not use
pipes on W32 anymore. As of svn r28516 (2013-08-12), it uses a pair of
sockets.
- --
O< ascii ribbon - stop html email! - www.asciiribbon.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (MingW32)
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSaA+HAAoJEOs4Jb6SI2CwX3kH/i/tTVHJjrIvfUdWRvYRFAqa
/KhtHhFwCbSYkSb30EZLM54QRXvviO1ySRotiq6V/WyMsI5XL3+ChV0Pb2AK4ur+
pHo8qUhD0di4rT6SlJuhgqyv9Ya0ejb8lfKYT0Kg3QeY8yTZcphjyXRHLv2Xv2C3
auvkggtpyPxtfmUGL0F3wz6USE4n/VM9dOVDafXDyykux9G3PzJuGjg3wJa43Avf
NS+lPd8SiOFmyhzCOFqbVyoae76b5zWWbF3L1ma6sjS/zhSJ9BwMr+uqz+86K2sc
LFM8CZs1iDddJk9V3H48VO2zKRhoyfQhSC4itN39uGpwiSin1eBDCwX3SrGf8kA=
=ghSa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- Re: [libmicrohttpd] Real Windows support?, (continued)
- Re: [libmicrohttpd] Real Windows support?, Luke-Jr, 2013/10/14
- Re: [libmicrohttpd] Real Windows support?, Evgeny Grin, 2013/10/16
- Re: [libmicrohttpd] Real Windows support?, Luke-Jr, 2013/10/16
- Re: [libmicrohttpd] Real Windows support?, Christian Grothoff, 2013/10/23
- Re: [libmicrohttpd] Real Windows support?, Nils Durner, 2013/10/23
- Re: [libmicrohttpd] Real Windows support?, Christian Grothoff, 2013/10/23
- Re: [libmicrohttpd] Real Windows support?, Nils Durner, 2013/10/23
- Re: [libmicrohttpd] Real Windows support?, Luke-Jr, 2013/10/23
- Re: [libmicrohttpd] Real Windows support?, Nils Durner, 2013/10/23
- Re: [libmicrohttpd] Real Windows support?,
LRN <=
Re: [libmicrohttpd] Real Windows support?, Nils Durner, 2013/10/14