Re: Possible bug in (cvs) ares_parse_srv_reply.c /

2009-10-27 Thread Jakub Hrozek
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/26/2009 05:13 PM, Daniel Stenberg wrote: Personally I tend to prefer a strict usage where the arguments are not optional (ie they must not be NULL) and the function implementations can assume that they are set correctly as per the

New release?

2009-10-27 Thread Jakub Hrozek
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello, I know there had been a similar question asked by Daniel a couple of months back, but since then, some other patches landed..so I wanted to ask again - does c-ares upstream plan a new release to facilitate the changes since 1.6.0? We

Re: New release?

2009-10-27 Thread Daniel Stenberg
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009, Jakub Hrozek wrote: I know there had been a similar question asked by Daniel a couple of months back, but since then, some other patches landed..so I wanted to ask again - does c-ares upstream plan a new release to facilitate the changes since 1.6.0? I'm all for doing a

Re: [PATCH] ares_parse_srv_reply

2009-10-27 Thread Yang Tse
Hi Jakub, It seems we still lack in CVS an ares_parse_srv_reply man page for the provided function. Cheers, -- -=[Yang]=-

Re: New release?

2009-10-27 Thread John Engelhart
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Daniel Stenberg dan...@haxx.se wrote: On Tue, 27 Oct 2009, Jakub Hrozek wrote: I know there had been a similar question asked by Daniel a couple of months back, but since then, some other patches landed..so I wanted to ask again - does c-ares upstream plan a

Re: New release?

2009-10-27 Thread Daniel Stenberg
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009, John Engelhart wrote: On investigation I found that ares_timeout was returning a timeout of 0 seconds and 0 microseconds. The little digging I've done so far turned up that ares_send.c sets the timeout to 0 seconds and 0 microseconds by default. That's the creation of

Re: New release?

2009-10-27 Thread John Engelhart
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 6:51 PM, Daniel Stenberg dan...@haxx.se wrote: On Tue, 27 Oct 2009, John Engelhart wrote: On investigation I found that ares_timeout was returning a timeout of 0 seconds and 0 microseconds. The little digging I've done so far turned up that ares_send.c sets the