On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 02:30:50PM +0100, Timo Keßler wrote:
> sure,
> as far as I've thought it through, the script would be invoked with the
> installation directory of
> polipo as first argument and an Integer (or string) as a second, which
> controls behavior, i.e. in which of 3 standard-locations to put the
> edited config :
> 
It would probably be better to improve Polipo's Windows port directly,
rather than rely on a script like this. It shouldn't be that hard to get
Polipo to detect name servers on Windows. Getting the disk cache to
function properly will be harder.
 
> HOWEVER I want to note, that all of this could be avoided and made
> unnessisary if the Windows-ports would be accompained by a config-file
> or config.sample that simply declares the most nessisary options with
> resonable values as follows:
>
I think these Polipo configuration issues are already covered by Tor's
Windows bundles. Is there a reason why a Windows user wishing to use Tor
would prefer to download a standalone Polipo package instead?

-- 
Christopher Davis
Mangrin Remailer Admin
PGP: 0x0F8DA163

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation
Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business
Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts
Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com
_______________________________________________
Polipo-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/polipo-users

Reply via email to