On Sat, 29 Nov 2014 08:42:17 +0100
Ivan Delalande wrote:
> Change the behavior of docroot, which is now used as a prefix path for
> all file operations related to static files. And add chrootdir, which is
> just the old docroot behavior and allows to control the path into which
> quark will chroo
On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 7:39 PM, Ivan Delalande wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 12:21:39PM +0100, Hiltjo Posthuma wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Ivan Delalande wrote:
>>> On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 09:28:24AM +0100, FRIGN wrote:
Hiltjo told me he was almost done with the changes, s
On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 12:21:39PM +0100, Hiltjo Posthuma wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Ivan Delalande wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 09:28:24AM +0100, FRIGN wrote:
>>> Hiltjo told me he was almost done with the changes, so as soon as he
>>> finishes this masterpiece, I'll merge it
Sorry nvm, I found the patch in the archives, somehow I did not
receive the first e-mail with the patch.
On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Ivan Delalande wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 09:28:24AM +0100, FRIGN wrote:
>> On Sat, 29 Nov 2014 08:42:17 +0100
>> Ivan Delalande wrote:
>> > This is implemented by moving the reqbuf buffer in the middle of a
>> > bigger buffer, reqpath. That buffer contains
On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 09:28:24AM +0100, FRIGN wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Nov 2014 08:42:17 +0100
> Ivan Delalande wrote:
>
> > Change the behavior of docroot, which is now used as a prefix path for
> > all file operations related to static files. And add chrootdir, which is
> > just the old docroot be
On Sat, 29 Nov 2014 08:42:17 +0100
Ivan Delalande wrote:
> Change the behavior of docroot, which is now used as a prefix path for
> all file operations related to static files. And add chrootdir, which is
> just the old docroot behavior and allows to control the path into which
> quark will chroo
On Fri, 15 Aug 2014 15:00:03 +0100
Dimitris Papastamos wrote:
> Quick style fix.
Thanks! Applied.
Cheers
FRIGN
--
FRIGN
On Sat, 9 Aug 2014 18:48:07 +0200
FRIGN wrote:
> I rethought it and centralized it a bit more. You don't
> need a line stating that a bogus or hidden file has been
> requested.
> Instead, just print a single line with a 401 and the
> requested string. Then you can easily see for yourself
> that t
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 17:38:52 +0200
FRIGN wrote:
> Let me know what you think. In case it's widely accepted, I'll apply it
> asap.
Ok, I'll just push it. In case there are issues, it can always be reverted.
Cheers
FRIGN
--
FRIGN
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 08:55:08PM +0200, Jakob Kramer wrote:
> There is wrong information about the installation directory and about
> how to run quark in the README.
Applied, thanks.
Hi Szabolcs,
On 4 February 2011 17:36, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> i recently implemented a webserver and used some code from quark in it
> meanwhile i found minor issues in the code so here is a patch
> (some modifications are bugfixes others are debateble,
> i leave it to arg to sort it out)
I like
* Bjartur Thorlacius [2011-02-08 19:10:48 +]:
> Anyhow, I believe you should be using HTTP headers, If- or not, as the
> hashes don't identify the referenced resource, and thusly shouldn't be
> in the URI.
hm i think i'll go with the suggested '?'
using a query parameter seems fine to me
and w
Anyhow, I believe you should be using HTTP headers, If- or not, as the
hashes don't identify the referenced resource, and thusly shouldn't be
in the URI.
On 2/5/11, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> * Bjartur Thorlacius [2011-02-05 22:59:02 +]:
>> As you don't need compatibility with browsers, you shou
* Bjartur Thorlacius [2011-02-05 22:59:02 +]:
> As you don't need compatibility with browsers, you should be using a
> HTTP header starting with If-. See
> http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec13.html
thanks for reminding me these
i discarded if- headers because they have different
On 2/5/11, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> you are right the uri spec does not allow it so lets go with '?'
> or '/' or '.' or.. i'll use something when i get there
As you don't need compatibility with browsers, you should be using a
HTTP header starting with If-. See
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rf
* Robert Ransom [2011-02-05 05:35:29 -0800]:
> Yes it is. See RFC 2616 (section 5.1.2) and RFC 3986 (section 4).
>
you are right the uri spec does not allow it so lets go with '?'
or '/' or '.' or.. i'll use something when i get there
> If you expect groups of servers to be disconnected for ext
On Sat, 5 Feb 2011 13:45:07 +0100
Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> * Robert Ransom [2011-02-04 18:56:48 -0800]:
> > > -> GET /key#hash-of-data HTTP/1.0\r\n\r\n
> > > <- [waiting..]
> >
> > The server will never see the fragment identifier (the "#" and text
> > following it).
>
> there is no such restric
* Robert Ransom [2011-02-04 18:56:48 -0800]:
> > -> GET /key#hash-of-data HTTP/1.0\r\n\r\n
> > <- [waiting..]
>
> The server will never see the fragment identifier (the "#" and text
> following it).
there is no such restriction in http nor in urls
(it's not a reserved character)
your browser st
On Fri, 4 Feb 2011 17:36:55 +0100
Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> offtopic:
>
> the webserver i'm implementing is used to do secure messaging:
> it accepts PUT /key and GET /key requests which store and retrieve
> exactly 1K data (so it looks like a key-value store)
>
> (server does not remember the key
20 matches
Mail list logo
