On Tue, 2016-12-13 at 10:55 -0200, Bruno Jesus wrote:
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 7:33 AM, Hans Leidekker hans@codeweavers.com wrote:
Signed-off-by: Hans Leidekker hans@codeweavers.com
dlls/winhttp/net.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------- 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
Hi, Isn't it better to make winhttp use ws2_32 just like wininet change [1]? Then we would have a single point for all networking code and EINTR is already covered in ws2_32.
[1] http://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git/commitdiff/5436fef80722fe7896aed5e659c...
I have been waiting for a more compelling reason. Moving to ws2_32 is not entirely free (e.g. from a performance or debugging perspective). I believe the wininet switch was motivated by programs that rely on wininet to initialize winsock, but I'm not aware of such problems with winhttp.