ProcessHeader procedure is
> called
> from
> ReceivedFromClient if and only if Client.GotHeader is false, but it is
> set
> to
> true after the very first invocation of the ProcessHeader, so it will
> not be
> called for all subsequent requests in a given connection.
>
Oh, it is that bug :((
Sorry for not including in the debate sooner, but I lost contact with
GpHttpProxy years ago when I started to work on a custom version for one of
my customers. Now I had no idea which of the problems I fixed years ago this
was (yes, I was not using source control at the time
> I have created an ICS group on LinkedIn. If you like to be a member, just
> point your browser to:
> http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/136245/012C3E2A8518
As someone that is not using social networks at all I have to ask - What are
the bonuses of joining this group?
Primoz
--
To unsubscribe or c
Just search for 'size_t' in MSDN:
"typedef unsigned int size_t;"
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb401794.aspx
Primoz
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Behalf Of Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd
> Sent: Saturday, December 15, 20
I don't remember what that was all about. Probably pre-D4 stuff?
Primoz [who submitted that change]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Arno Garrels
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 7:44 PM
To: 'ICS support mailing'
Subject: [twsocket] Typedef TS
Can you please also translate the
// On a une superbe fenętre. Dans les informations associées,
enregistre la
// référence ŕ notre objet. Elle permettra plus tard d'invoquer la
// méthode WndProc de gestion des messages envoyés ŕ la fenętre
in TIcsWndHandler.AllocateHWnd?
Sure. I'm fine with that.
Primoz
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Behalf Of Arno Garrels
> Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2007 9:36 AM
> To: ICS support mailing
> Subject: Re: [twsocket] ICS v5 compatibility / WndProc handling
>
> Primož Gabrijelcic w
It works fine in our applications.
Primoz
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Arno Garrels
Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2007 8:08 PM
To: ICS support mailing
Subject: Re: [twsocket] ICS v5 compatibility / WndProc handling
Looks usefull, though not
Hello everybody (and especially Francois).
I have this legacy code that was written using ICS v5. Deep inside some
message processing (specifically RAS handling) is done in overridden WndProc
methods.
When I switched to ICS v6, this code broke. This was mainly expected - ICS
v6 cannot know which
closing HTTP/1.1 connections without
Connection header
Yes I changed that part in our descendent class as well. I did not notice
it contained a RFC-break--I just thought it would be better this way, so did
not report it.
Best Regards,
SZ
On 5/15/07, Primož Gabrijelčič <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> What would happen with your code if the version is HTTP/0.9?
> These are clients written before the HTTP1.0 RFC! I think you
> need to parse the exact version number and also consider the
> future versions as well:
Exactly because of future versions I was testing against '1.0' and not
'1.1'.
Hello, everybody.
Does anybody know why does HttpSrv (1.41, ICS v5) default to closing
connection when client sends HTTP/1.1 request without a Connection: header?
IOW, when THttpServer receives
GET / HTTP/1.1
it will close the connection after sending the response. If one adds
'Connection: keep-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Behalf Of Francois Piette
>
> This si not a winsock or TCP/IP component issue. It is an OS issue. I
> don't know Windows has an API to force a thread to run on a given CPU.
SetThreadAffinityMask
> You have an API to know the number of proc
An usual practice in the RFC world is to be very strict when sending data
and very forgiving when receiving. I always code such tests as 'if
SameText(..., ...)'.
I would support this "fix", too.
Primoz
> Hum... is this really a bug or is it Abyss server that is not
> RFC compliant with a small
No worries, I decoded it in first attempt :)
Primoz
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fastream
> Technologies
> Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 10:11 AM
> To: ICS support mailing
> Subject: Re: [twsocket] listening on a multihome
Thanks.
Primoz
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fastream
> Technologies
> Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 9:27 AM
> To: ICS support mailing
> Subject: Re: [twsocket] listening on a multihomed computer
>
> Hi,
>
> You can liste
Hello everybody,
I have a following situation. Customer has a multihomed computer (let's say
with three public IP addresses) and wants my ICS-based server to bind to
only _two_ of those addresses. Is there a way to do that in ICS? If not, is
this a limitation of ICS or WinSock?
The closest I have
> All in all I wonder if it is not better to simply make V6 as
> compatible as possible with V5. That is dropping support for
> old compilers (this would make the source code much cleaner)
> and adding new features without breaking existing ones. If I
> do that, current ICS user would have no c
> Sorry, you are wrong. IP Helper only monitors all traffic
> through a card, it does not distinguish LAN or WAN (via a
> router) traffic.
>
> So it is useless for monitoring routed WAN traffic, which
> needs to be identified by IP address range.
I think that the BME only checks the netmas
> Well, async cannot take advantage of multi-processor systems.
> Also for CGI and ISAPI execution, threads seem to be a better
> way. And all the commercial Web servers I know such as IIS
> and Apache chose it for these reasons.
You are mixing up two factors.
Even on multi-processor system, o
20 matches
Mail list logo
