Hi guys,
So what is the final word about adding ns_sha1 in the core?
I would really like to add it and eliminate additional requirement for
naviserver installation for third party module.
--
Vlad Seryakov
571 262-8608 office
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.crystalballinc.com/vlad/
I know, it is just the core of the update to be approved
Zoran Vasiljevic wrote:
On Saturday 05 March 2005 18:36, Vlad Seryakov wrote:
Patch is attached, if everybody is Okay with it i will commit it
Do not forget to update include/ns.h
and put the prototype there!
Zoran Vasiljevic wr
On Saturday 05 March 2005 18:36, Vlad Seryakov wrote:
> Patch is attached, if everybody is Okay with it i will commit it
Do not forget to update include/ns.h
and put the prototype there!
>
> Zoran Vasiljevic wrote:
> > On Saturday 05 March 2005 01:33, Stephen Deasey wrote:
> >
> >>I added the
Patch is attached, if everybody is Okay with it i will commit it
Zoran Vasiljevic wrote:
On Saturday 05 March 2005 01:33, Stephen Deasey wrote:
I added the function Ns_ConnSetResponseStatus() for the protocols
stuff, but I didn't add the Tcl equivalent to ns_conn. I aggree with
Vlad that ns_c
ns_respond closes the connection, so you cannot use it, still need
ns_conn status newstatus command.
Zoran Vasiljevic wrote:
On Saturday 05 March 2005 01:33, Stephen Deasey wrote:
Does ns_respond do what you need?
ns_respond ?-status status? ?-type type? \
{ ?-string string? | ?-file fi
On Saturday 05 March 2005 01:33, Stephen Deasey wrote:
> I added the function Ns_ConnSetResponseStatus() for the protocols
> stuff, but I didn't add the Tcl equivalent to ns_conn. I aggree with
> Vlad that ns_conn status ?newStatus? would be a good addition (which
> requires that we drop connid :-
On Saturday 05 March 2005 01:33, Stephen Deasey wrote:
> Does ns_respond do what you need?
>
> ns_respond ?-status status? ?-type type? \
> { ?-string string? | ?-file filename? | ?-fileid fileid? } \
> ?-length length? ?-headers setid?
The main reason for such mechanism for me is:
I wo
