On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 7:37 PM, Zac Brown zac@zacbrown.org wrote:
Setup winhttp.h and wininet.h with type guards to allow for use of wininet.h in winhttp implementation.
--snip--
Note: I am unsure of whether its better to do this, or finish up winhttp.h and then create a private header in dlls/winhttp for winhttp to use.
diff --git a/dlls/winhttp/Makefile.in b/dlls/winhttp/Makefile.in index e69b137..7e8146f 100644 --- a/dlls/winhttp/Makefile.in +++ b/dlls/winhttp/Makefile.in @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ SRCDIR = @srcdir@ VPATH = @srcdir@ MODULE = winhttp.dll IMPORTLIB = winhttp -IMPORTS = kernel32 +IMPORTS = wininet kernel32
C_SRCS = main.c
I thought the idea was to implement winhttp and then implement wininet on top of winhttp. Why are you importing wininet?
On Friday 18 July 2008 05:45:15 James Hawkins wrote:
I thought the idea was to implement winhttp and then implement wininet on top of winhttp. Why are you importing wininet?
wininet on top of winhttp is the most promising option but I don't think a consensus has been reached yet.
A technical issue I see is that winhttp does not implement some of the more obscure status notifications that wininet supports.
And there are process issues to solve as well. If we're going to duplicate code first I'm pretty sure it will have diverged by the time wininet is rewritten on top of winhttp.
The best approach is perhaps to develop this in full on a private branch. A port of the wininet test suite, augmented with tests to prove feasibility of this approach would be a prerequisite for merging into Wine.
-Hans