Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
this wont work either. for the value of the cookie, it must be what
it was before. tspecials2. those are the correct characters for the
"value" of the cookie, but they are not correct for the "path"
I'm not convinced of this yet. I am doing some more testing but I
think things are being complicated by some potential bugs in the new
parsing code. Now we have the test cases, I'll look at adding some
more tests and go from there.
don't think there are any bugs in the parsing code, it's just in the
autoswitch, that just need to autoswitch on the value.
Right now it doesn't appear to parse the following header correctly:
Cookie: a=(
which is a valid v0 cookie. This is interfering with the testing I am
trying to do.
I am still working my way through the RFC2965 to see why such a long list
of separators is being used. Any pointers appreciated.
Mark
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
