>> And do we really transmit in that small a chunk size?
>
> Well, I was unable to send bigger than 2kB - maybe it is websockify related
> problem.
> In spice-gtk we are sending 64KB and thanks to it the performance is much
> better.
This is probably worth some research. I glanced through we
Hi,
>
> Great, thanks. And yeah, IE support is dicey at best. I think the
> ideal is that we at least downgrade functionality gracefully, instead
> of
> failing.
>
> I have been playing with your patches, and they seem to work nicely.
> I'll try to comment more formally on the v3 set.
>
> My
On 01/12/2015 11:29 AM, Pavel Grunt wrote:
> Problem was in my server, now I am able to test IE so I will send v3 soon.
Great, thanks. And yeah, IE support is dicey at best. I think the
ideal is that we at least downgrade functionality gracefully, instead of
failing.
I have been playing with yo
Problem was in my server, now I am able to test IE so I will send v3 soon.
Pavel
>
> Hi Jeremy,
>
> Thank you. You are right about the MediaSource API, spice-html5 in
> IE11 gets other errors like Channel type 0 unknown, Channel type 177
> unknown and after that it even kills my VM.
>
Hi Jeremy,
Thank you. You are right about the MediaSource API, spice-html5 in IE11 gets
other errors like Channel type 0 unknown, Channel type 177 unknown and after
that it even kills my VM.
I will try to figure it out.
Best regards,
Pavel
>
> Hi Pavel,
>
>
> I'm able to run spice-html5 i
Hi Pavel,
It worked in Firefox and Google Chrome, but I was unable to run spice-html5 in
IE11 (I guess it was because IE11 does not support MediaSource API).
I'm able to run spice-html5 in IE11, although I do get console messages
about the MediaSource API. That failure should just mean that
Hi Jeremy,
Thanks a lot for your feedback.
>
> Hi Pavel,
>
>
> This looks like a great addition; thanks for doing this work.
>
> I've got a few general questions, and then some specific comments on
> some of the patches.
>
> General questions: what browsers have you tested this with?
> Oste
Hi Pavel,
On 01/07/2015 07:16 AM, Pavel Grunt wrote:
Hi, the intetion of this series is to add the ability to transfer files from
the client to the guest.
To make it work it was convenient to start using agent tokens (PATCH 1/4 & 2/4)
because there can be a lot of agent messages when sending
Hi, the intetion of this series is to add the ability to transfer files from
the client to the guest.
To make it work it was convenient to start using agent tokens (PATCH 1/4 & 2/4)
because there can be a lot of agent messages when sending a file.
Methods for the transfer are based on relevant m
