В Wed, 19 Nov 2014 13:23:05 -0800 Alan Perry <ape...@snowmoose.com> пишет:
> On 11/19/14, 10:22 AM, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: > > В Wed, 19 Nov 2014 09:27:00 -0800 > > Alan Perry <ape...@snowmoose.com> пишет: > > > >> On 11/19/14, 9:09 AM, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: > >>> В Wed, 19 Nov 2014 08:54:24 -0800 > >>> Alan Perry <ape...@snowmoose.com> пишет: > >>> > >>>> Has anyone come up with a general way to change the port number in the > >>>> http module? Right now it is hard coded to be 80, but it is very common > >>>> to do HTTP over another port number. > >>>> > >>>> I was thinking about extending the device name syntax for network devices > >>> Does protocol,server:port conflict with anything? (http,server:1234)/foo > >> I separated the server from the port with a comma > > Do you have implementation? Then send a patch for review. > > It is more like prototype code and I need to clean it up. > > > > >> because that is how > >> the protocol is separated from server. I don't think either syntax > >> conflicts with anything else, > > Actually ':' does conflict with IPv6. > > > >> but I haven't been working with enough > >> different parts of GRUB2 to really know. > >> > >> In my previous note, I mentioned a command for setting the default > >> server, but I was really talking about the net_default_server env > >> variable. Thinking about it, an alternate default port doesn't make > >> sense because you really need to know its protocol as well. Maybe a > >> default protocol or protocol/port env variable that includes both allows > >> the alternate port for the protocol to be specified? > >> > > Does not > > > > set root=protocol,server,[?port] > > > > do exactly that? > > Yes, it can be done that way. But I was wondering if there needs to be > an protocol/port variant of net_default_server. Or do I not understand > the intended use of net_default_server? > Initially grub did not support (proto,server) syntax for net devices so default_server was the only way to change server. Today it is mostly to record result of PXE auto configuration. Set support is there for legacy usage, but I do not see any need to extend it. > alan > > > > >>>> and/or adding a 'default port' (with a command to set it) to go with > >>> default server. I did an implementation that works for my needs but > >>> don't think it is a good general purpose implementation. > >>>> Has anyone else done work here or have ideas for using alternate port > >>>> numbers with HTTP? > >>>> > >>>> alan > >>>> > >>>> > > > _______________________________________________ > Grub-devel mailing list > Grub-devel@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
