[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [libmicrohttpd] [GSoC Update] Week 1

From: Tim Rühsen
Subject: Re: [libmicrohttpd] [GSoC Update] Week 1
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2017 21:37:54 +0200
User-agent: KMail/5.2.3 (Linux/4.9.0-3-amd64; KDE/5.28.0; x86_64; ; )

Hi Didik,

thanks for the summary of week #1 !

On Dienstag, 6. Juni 2017 00:40:56 CEST Didik Setiawan wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Jun 2017 23:51:00 +0700 Christian Grothoff <address@hidden> 
> > Maybe I missed something, but why should the MHD dependency become
> > _mandatory_? Why not conditionally-compile and run the tests only if MHD
> > is present?
> Maybe I just misinterpreting this [1]? What Darshit said about removing old
> server code from the codebase will make Wget2 more stable since we will not
> be susceptible to bugs in the HTTP Server code.
> So, if it is better options, I will amend my current change, make MHD
> optional, give fallback to the old server code if MHD not available.

I guess Christian meant to skip the appropriate tests if MHD is not installed/
available. We should definitely get rid of our server code in libwget and focus 
on client functionality. Kick it out once MHD code works :-)

But of course we want to run as many tests as possible with MinGW as well... 
maybe you provide a script (e.g. in contrib/) that downloads/builds/installs 
MHD. Add that script to our CI runner YAML file(s) and we can test on MinGW as 
well. Let me know which packages you need for the docker images.

> > MHD does the same for libcurl.  Making the dependency optional also avoids
> > the obvious possibility of circular dependencies if we ever were to add
> > libwget2-based tests to MHD :-).
> That's our goal too. Make libwget as alternative for libcurl.
> [1]

With Best Regards, Tim

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

reply via email to

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