Re: [libmicrohttpd] [PATCH] code style: remove tabs from source code
Hi Moritz,
Removing tabs might be desirable, but this patch destroys indentation
(see stark example below), which is not.
My 2 cents.
Happy hacking!
Christian
On 01/24/2018 02:23 PM, Moritz Warning wrote:
>if (url == NULL)
> {
> - MHD_stop_daemon (d);
> - return 16;
> + MHD_stop_daemon (d);
> + return 16;
> }
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [libmicrohttpd] [PATCH] code style: remove tabs from source code
Hi Christian,
I agree with you and Tim. It breaks some indentations. But it was broken before
like this in other places, too.
Replacing the tabs with two spaces seem to be a step into the right direction
to me.
I am not able to contribute more work right now.
Well, do as you like. :-)
have fun,
mwarning
On 01/24/2018 02:52 PM, Christian Grothoff wrote:
> Hi Moritz,
>
>
> Removing tabs might be desirable, but this patch destroys indentation
> (see stark example below), which is not.
>
> My 2 cents.
>
> Happy hacking!
>
> Christian
>
> On 01/24/2018 02:23 PM, Moritz Warning wrote:
>>if (url == NULL)
>> {
>> -MHD_stop_daemon (d);
>> -return 16;
>> + MHD_stop_daemon (d);
>> + return 16;
>> }
>
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [libmicrohttpd] Unable to connect to libmicrohttpd in embedded system.
You're welcome buddy! :-) On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 3:23 PM, Marcel Rutten wrote: > Thanks Christian, > > I checked the error; "Invalid argument". > > > But I've not yet heard about a buggy accept4() implementation... > > This is a first, then :-) : > I blocked accept4() in favour of accept(), and now it works. Don't ask why. > > Anyway, this is the software environment: > kernel 2.6.36, glibc 2.10.1. (as I said already, old stuff). Processor ARM > 926 EJS, arm-linux-gnueabi. > Thanks everyone for your comments. I learned something from all of you. > > @Silvio: Thanks for looking up the code, I'll save it for reference, it > may be very useful in the future. > > > On 22 January 2018 at 23:43, Christian Grothoff > wrote: > >> -1 can be *normal*, as MHD calls 'accept()' (possibly via multiple >> threads when using a thread pool) until there are no more clients. You >> should check what errno says. >> >> Also, in case accept4() is buggy on your platform, it is an >> optimization; so you could #undef HAVE_ACCEPT4 if accept() + >> setsockopt() works better. But I've not yet heard about a buggy >> accept4() implementation... >> >> Happy hacking! >> >> Christian >> >> On 01/22/2018 11:32 PM, Marcel Rutten wrote: >> > Found it. accept4() returns an invalid socket. >> > I will carry on tomorrow, it's almost midnight in my time zone ... >> > -- Silvio Clécio
