On 2005.01.10, Jeff Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If try to use nsreturn [ns_gzip ...] the special handling for
> encodings won't be done correctly (that's my guess anyway, not having
> looked at the code). You really need to do all the encoding jive
> before compressing.
Ah, right - encodin
In a message dated 1/10/05 3:27:42 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If try to use nsreturn [ns_gzip ...] the special handling for
encodings won't be done correctly (that's my guess anyway, not having
looked at the code). You really need to do all the encoding jive
before compressing.
Yes -- ex
If try to use nsreturn [ns_gzip ...] the special handling for
encodings won't be done correctly (that's my guess anyway, not having
looked at the code). You really need to do all the encoding jive
before compressing.
--Jeff
--
AOLserver - http://www.aolserver.com/
To Remove yourself from this
In a message dated 1/10/05 2:58:04 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>> But since the work is/will-be underway to make the adp's gzip savvy
>> I thought why not making the built-in ns_return also?
What about the original rl_returnz/ns_returnz modules being incorporated
into the distribution?
H
On 2005.01.10, C. R. Oldham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> AOLserver Discussion wrote:
>
> >> But since the work is/will-be underway to make the adp's gzip savvy
> >> I thought why not making the built-in ns_return also?
>
> What about the original rl_returnz/ns_returnz modules being incorporated
> i
AOLserver Discussion wrote:
>> But since the work is/will-be underway to make the adp's gzip savvy
>> I thought why not making the built-in ns_return also?
What about the original rl_returnz/ns_returnz modules being incorporated
into the distribution?
--cro
--
AOLserver - http://www.aolserver
In a message dated 1/10/05 2:18:58 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Monday 10 January 2005 20:07, Andrew Piskorski wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 07:56:01PM +0100, Zoran Vasiljevic wrote:
> > On Monday 10 January 2005 19:15, Dossy Shiobara wrote:
>
> > > http://aolserver.com/sf/rfe/1099613
>
>
On 2005.01.10, Zoran Vasiljevic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ... with external package/module, yes.
Is that the issue?
> But since the work is/will-be underway to make the adp's gzip savvy
> I thought why not making the built-in ns_return also?
I've looked at Vlad's ns_gzip code and I'm not enti
On 2005.01.10, Zoran Vasiljevic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This all is for ADP.
> What about ns_return?
No plans for gzip compression in ns_return right now. What uses of
ns_return are there that would require on-the-fly gzip compression?
If you're using ns_return, using Vlad's ns_gzip will al
On Monday 10 January 2005 20:07, Andrew Piskorski wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 07:56:01PM +0100, Zoran Vasiljevic wrote:
> > On Monday 10 January 2005 19:15, Dossy Shiobara wrote:
>
> > > http://aolserver.com/sf/rfe/1099613
>
> > This all is for ADP.
> > What about ns_return?
>
> I though ns_re
On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 07:56:01PM +0100, Zoran Vasiljevic wrote:
> On Monday 10 January 2005 19:15, Dossy Shiobara wrote:
> > http://aolserver.com/sf/rfe/1099613
> This all is for ADP.
> What about ns_return?
I though ns_return already can use some sort of gzip option?
--
Andrew Piskorski <[EM
On Monday 10 January 2005 19:15, Dossy Shiobara wrote:
> I just filed this RFE for a feature I'm going to add to what will soon
> be AOLserver 4.0.10 and wanted to get some feedback from the community.
>
> http://aolserver.com/sf/rfe/1099613
>
This all is for ADP.
What about ns_return?
Cheers,
Zo
I just filed this RFE for a feature I'm going to add to what will soon
be AOLserver 4.0.10 and wanted to get some feedback from the community.
http://aolserver.com/sf/rfe/1099613
> Summary: ns_adp_compress: apply gzip to outgoing ADP buffer
>
> Initial Comment:
> Using the new Ns_Compress() funct
13 matches
Mail list logo
