On Sat, 21 Jul 2007, Dan Fandrich wrote:
>> 1) for pre-C99 compilers we set a fixed max amount of file descriptors
>> (like 256 or so)
>
> How about using alloca(3) where available? That would give the best of both
> worlds (dynamic sizing and better portability).
Right, the approaches would r
Hi,
> Finally, I want the next release to be version 1.0 to end the sub zero
> release series as I believe libssh2 is quite usable as it currently works.
I know. The reason I've suggested just a 0.16.0 is because I wanted it just now;
if we speak of 1.0 I fear that there come a bunch of things up w
On Sat, Jul 21, 2007 at 03:03:22PM +0200, Daniel Stenberg wrote:
> But I thought some more about this problem and I think we should rather not
> introduce a new function but instead do two things:
>
> 1) for pre-C99 compilers we set a fixed max amount of file descriptors (like
> 256 or so)
H
On Jul 21, 2007, at 9:03 AM, Daniel Stenberg wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jul 2007, James Housley wrote:
>
>>> But how would you fix the existing one? We should at least make
>>> it C89...
>>
>> That I don't know. Is there a nice constant for the max file
>> descriptors we could use? It seems unlikel
On Fri, 20 Jul 2007, James Housley wrote:
>> But how would you fix the existing one? We should at least make it C89...
>
> That I don't know. Is there a nice constant for the max file descriptors we
> could use? It seems unlikely that libssh2 would have more then a couple
> open at a time, unl
On Jul 20, 2007, at 11:41 AM, Daniel Stenberg wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jul 2007, James Housley wrote:
>
>> Then now might be a good time for someone with interest in
>> libssh2_poll() to create libssh2_poll_ex() to add session so there
>> is access to the custom alloc
>
> But how would you fix the
On Fri, 20 Jul 2007, James Housley wrote:
> Then now might be a good time for someone with interest in libssh2_poll() to
> create libssh2_poll_ex() to add session so there is access to the custom
> alloc
But how would you fix the existing one? We should at least make it C89...
On Jul 20, 2007, at 11:15 AM, Daniel Stenberg wrote:
[snip]
> Finally, I want the next release to be version 1.0 to end the sub
> zero release
> series as I believe libssh2 is quite usable as it currently works.
Then now might be a good time for someone with interest in
libssh2_poll() to cre
On Fri, 20 Jul 2007, Guenter Knauf wrote:
> not in the mood to make a 0.16.0 test release, smile??
>
> well, I think we should really start to make more often releases; that makes
> it also easier to track down bugs, and easier for the users to report bugs
> correctly
>
> in addition I think
On Jul 20, 2007, at 7:30 AM, Guenter Knauf wrote:
> Hi,
>> I've committed some changes, so now we use the script 'maketgz' to
>> build
>> release source tarballs. It does a little extra magic before
>> calling 'make
>> dist', such as fixing the version defines and stuff to be correct.
>
>> My
Hi,
> I've committed some changes, so now we use the script 'maketgz' to build
> release source tarballs. It does a little extra magic before calling 'make
> dist', such as fixing the version defines and stuff to be correct.
> My daily snapshots script has been updated accordingly.
> My commit me
11 matches
Mail list logo
