[MPlayer-dev-eng] [PATCH] Add support for login/password in http_proxy env variable

[Clément Bœsch]

On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 11:34:09PM +0100, Reimar Döffinger wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 09:55:56PM +0100, Clément Bœsch wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 09:33:54PM +0100, Reimar Döffinger wrote:
> > > On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 08:53:48PM +0100, Clément Bœsch wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 11:09:40PM +0100, Clément Bœsch wrote:
> > > > > On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 12:01:16AM +0100, Clément Bœsch wrote:
> > > > > > On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 11:33:28AM +0100, Reimar Döffinger wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 08:34:40PM +0100, Clément Bœsch wrote:
> > > > > > > > +    if (proxy->username && proxy->password)
> > > > > > > > +        return snprintf(dst, dst_size, "http_proxy://%s:%s@%s:%d/%s",
> > > > > > > > +                        proxy->username, proxy->password, proxy->hostname,
> > > > > > > > +                        proxy->port, host_url);
> > > > > > > > +    else
> > > > > > > > +        return snprintf(dst, dst_size, "http_proxy://%s:%d/%s",
> > > > > > > > +                        proxy->hostname, proxy->port, host_url);
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I think some other code supported also setting only username.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Updated.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Also is port certain to be valid (!= 0) here?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Not it's set to 0 (this is the current behaviour) and handled later. I
> > > > > > don't really like this method but changing it belongs to another commit.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > OK to commit?
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > No news so I suppose it's ok; i'll commit this at the end of the week end
> > > > if there is not objection.
> > > 
> > > You should maybe send your updated patch first, I think the email where
> > > you said "Updated" contained no attachment...
> > 
> > It had attachment (I just checked). Note that mailman seems completely
> > broken with attachments so you can't trust mplayer-dev-eng archives for
> > this. Anyway, patch is reattached to this mail with minor simplifications
> > to ease review.
> 
> Sorry, I looked at the wrong email. I think it should be ok.
> 

Applied.

> > I also remember you talking about an ipv6 ugliness/issue, could you tell
> > me what was wrong?
> 
> The escaping code has a special-case so it would not clobber litteral
> IPv6 addresses.
> But that code will not work for e.g.
> http_proxy://proxy/http://[<ipv6-address>]
> since it will destroy the [] around the ipv6 address in that case.

Mmh ok, I'll have a look. Thanks.

-- 
Clément B.
Not sent from a jesusPhone.