Re: [Nautilus-list] HTTP Libraries

[Darin Adler <darin eazel com>]

> I don't really know why we're using ghttp anywhere - we should be using
> gnome-vfs wherever we're currently using ghttp (in my opinion). Its not
> that gnome-vfs is better, its just that we already depend on it, and
> if we can reduce the number of dependancies thats a good thing. It will
> also help us avoid problems like the ones in:
> components/services/install/lib/eazel-install-protocols.c
> where there are functions called http_fetch_remote_file,
> ftp_fetch_remote_file and local_fetch_remote_file. The http one uses ghttp,
> the local one uses regular local filesystem calls, and the ftp one returns
> an error. I we use gnome-vfs for all of these we only need to write the
> function once - and FTP would work :-)

I agree that using gnome-vfs instead would be a good idea in theory. In
practice I don't know if the current version of gnome-vfs provides enough
error handling and control. In an attempt to abstract the difference between
things like http and local files we currently hide many details that may
need to be exposed if we want gnome-vfs to be useful in cases like this.

> Of more concern is the fact that all of the HTTP libraries will maintain
> separate sets of cookies, authentication info, referrer history, and have
> different user-agent strings. Ramiro tells me we can share the auth info
> between gnome-vfs and mozilla fairly easily, but the rest are could be a
> problem.

Does gnome-vfs maintain cookies at all? What about this other stuff? As far
as I know, these issues are pretty-much all ignored by the current gnome-vfs
HTTP implementation.

    -- Darin