On 04/20/2011 04:55 PM, Vic Lee wrote: > Hi Mads, > > I agree to have it in FreeRDP, but I do *not* agree to have it in > libfreerdp. That's two different thing. libfreerdp is the core library > that implement the core RDP protocol. If SOCKS4 got built in, should > SOCKS5? HTTP proxy? SSH tunnel? Unix socket? That's messing up the > readibility and the project's structural design.
You have a point there. But it all follows from how we have tcp.c as a part of libfreerdp and thus have hardcoded that we use tcp sockets. tcp.c is however also the part of libfreerdp that has most platform specific code (plus the ui_select callback - whatever that is intended to do). The best solution would perhaps be to more or less move tcp.c out of libfreerdp and replace it with ui callbacks. That would also let us get rid of the not-so-pretty rdp_get_fds and rdp_check_fds. We would however still have to expose a FD to the TLS layer (apparently). /Mads ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Benefiting from Server Virtualization: Beyond Initial Workload Consolidation -- Increasing the use of server virtualization is a top priority.Virtualization can reduce costs, simplify management, and improve application availability and disaster protection. Learn more about boosting the value of server virtualization. http://p.sf.net/sfu/vmware-sfdev2dev _______________________________________________ Freerdp-devel mailing list Freerdp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freerdp-devel
