Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

I'm unable to pin point the reason why its not failing. Checking the hook file, an error is definitely raised when the contents don't match. That shows up in the log as well. Where exactly should I be looking? Kushagra

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

On 10 February 2016 at 22:41, Kushagra Singh wrote: > I figured out the mistake, I guess. The cookie was getting expired and > wasn't getting saved to the file. I added --keep-session-cookies to > WGET_OPTIONS, now I can see the cookies being saved in the file. > >

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

Hi, I worked on the new test today, it is functional after applying the the last patch by Tim suggested. I am facing a problem here. I am trying to set a secure cookie over an insecure connection (without applying my patch, so the test should fail). The cookie, although being set (cross checked

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

I made a small mistake in the last patch, here is the correct one Kushagra On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 1:23 AM, Kushagra Singh < singh.kushagra.1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I worked on the new test today, it is functional after applying the the > last patch by Tim suggested. > > I am facing a

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

That's no problem. Just mentioning it, so the thread stays alive and we don't entirely forget about it. On 3 February 2016 at 09:11, Kushagra Singh wrote: > I'm out of town right now, I'll be able to get back to it in a couple of > days. Sorry for the delay! > >

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

That's fine. The patch was good. Now waiting on Kushagra's tests and his copyright assignment to go through On 1 February 2016 at 21:13, Tim Rühsen wrote: > Ups, just pushed your patch accidentially (thanks anyway). > I wanted to wait for Darshit to confirm it... > >

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

Ups, just pushed your patch accidentially (thanks anyway). I wanted to wait for Darshit to confirm it... Regards, Tim Am Sonntag, 31. Januar 2016, 17:40:12 schrieb Ander Juaristi: > The test looks good to me, but I think I've spotted a bug _in the test > engine_ where the 'RejectHeader' rule

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

On 01/30/2016 09:31 PM, Kushagra Singh wrote: Hi, I'm a bit stuck while writing tests. How do I test the fact that a secure only cookie does not get saved over an insecure connection? Even if the cookie gets saved, it will not be transmitted over an insecure connection (cookie_matches_url()

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

On 31 January 2016 at 17:55, Ander Juaristi wrote: > > > On 01/30/2016 09:31 PM, Kushagra Singh wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I'm a bit stuck while writing tests. How do I test the fact that a secure >> only cookie does not get saved over an insecure connection? Even if the >> cookie

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

Lol, contrib/check-hard stops here with: css.c: In function 'yyensure_buffer_stack': css.c:5889:21: error: C++ style comments are not allowed in ISO C90 num_to_alloc = 1; // After all that talk, this was set to 1 anyways... $ flex --version 2.6.0 Flex bug ??? Tim Am Freitag, 29. Januar

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

Yeah, flex bug fixed already in upstream (commit 07d89829cce4527c7614a34642d4b2c2ef5d6005) Tim Am Samstag, 30. Januar 2016, 22:52:07 schrieb Tim Rühsen: > Lol, contrib/check-hard stops here with: > > css.c: In function 'yyensure_buffer_stack': > css.c:5889:21: error: C++ style comments are not

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

Some Travis tests show that this patch still breaks on the Russian locale. However, all tests pass without this patch. While I don't see anything obvious that is causing the breakage, it remains a fact that the test suite is not passing. The issue however *may* just be a Valgrind bug. The failure

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

Looks good now. Would like to see tests for the same though. On 29 January 2016 at 09:19, Kushagra Singh wrote: > Hi, > > > > On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 2:02 AM, Darshit Shah wrote: >> >> On 27 January 2016 at 20:52, Kushagra Singh >>

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

Hi, On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 2:02 AM, Darshit Shah wrote: > On 27 January 2016 at 20:52, Kushagra Singh > wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 5:06 PM, Tim Ruehsen wrote: > >> > >> > > What about the '#ifdef HAVE_SSL'

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

On 27 January 2016 at 20:52, Kushagra Singh wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 5:06 PM, Tim Ruehsen wrote: >> >> > > What about the '#ifdef HAVE_SSL' ? Don't we need the check always ? >> >> Sorry for my irritating text. What I tried to

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 5:06 PM, Tim Ruehsen wrote: > > > What about the '#ifdef HAVE_SSL' ? Don't we need the check always ? > > Sorry for my irritating text. What I tried to ask/say was "Do we need the > #ifdef in cookie_handle_set_cookie() at all ?". > > And btw, do we

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

> > What about the '#ifdef HAVE_SSL' ? Don't we need the check always ? Sorry for my irritating text. What I tried to ask/say was "Do we need the #ifdef in cookie_handle_set_cookie() at all ?". And btw, do we need it in parse_set_cookie() ? Darshit said it with clearer words (and I agree with

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

Hi Kushagra, I made a few tests with and without UTF-8 locale - and they all succeeded here. (@Darshit: Could you reproduce the test failures outside Travis ?) What about the '#ifdef HAVE_SSL' ? Don't we need the check always ? Imagine you have some secure cookies saved and then try a non-SSL

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

I believe I am checking for the macro HAVE_SSL whenever required, did I miss it out anywhere? I'll have a look again. Kush On 27/01/2016 2:30 pm, "Tim Ruehsen" wrote: > Hi Kushagra, > > > I made a few tests with and without UTF-8 locale - and they all succeeded > here. > >

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

On 27 January 2016 at 10:00, Tim Ruehsen wrote: > Hi Kushagra, > > > I made a few tests with and without UTF-8 locale - and they all succeeded > here. > > (@Darshit: Could you reproduce the test failures outside Travis ?) Interestingly, no. But Travis seems to fail

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

Hi, You're absolutely right, I have merged the commits into one patch, and removed the trailing whitespaces in the patch. Please find it attached, I hope it's okay now. I have fixed the error which was breaking the build when configured with "--without-ssl". I can't figure out why the build

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

Hi Kushagra, Thanks for the patches! A couple of remarks on your patches before I dive into the code: 1. Please merge your changes into fewer, more logical patches. Making small patches when working locally is a good idea, but when you submit them for merging, they should be reorganized into

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

I have added the first two out the three recommendations in the draft. The third one is relevant when cookies have to be removed in case the total number of cookies hit a predefined upper bound, I'm not sure whether we do that in wget? As you mentioned, I had to change some method prototypes to

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

Thanks a lot for the help! I've made some progress, but have a couple of more questions - I can't manage to find the http-only-flag in the cookie struct, do we not store this? - The draft asks to check whether the "scheme" component of the "request-uri" denotes a secure protocol or not.

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

On 23 January 2016 at 23:36, Kushagra Singh wrote: > Thanks a lot for the help! > > I've made some progress, but have a couple of more questions > > - I can't manage to find the http-only-flag in the cookie struct, do we not > store this? Since Wget supports only

[Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

Hi, I am a second year student at studying CSE at IIIT Delhi. I was working on implementing [1], suggested by Darnir so as to get a good understanding of the wget source code. The draft updates, section 5.3, Step 8 of RC6265, regarding the secure parameter in the set cookie header. The draft

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

Hi Kushagra, On Tuesday 19 January 2016 12:51:59 Kushagra Singh wrote: > Hi, > > I am a second year student at studying CSE at IIIT Delhi. I was working on > implementing [1], suggested by Darnir so as to get a good understanding of > the wget source code. > > The draft updates, section 5.3,

Re: [Bug-wget] Implementing draft to update RFC6265

Tim has already answered all of your queries, but I'd just like to point out that GitHub isn't our mode of communication nor does it host our official source repository. The source repository is hosted on the savannah servers and ideally you should be using that as your upstream repo. The various