From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2010 20:08:05 +0100 From: Enrico Weigelt To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Message-ID: <20101113190805.GA22589@nibiru.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Subject: [9fans] webfs + mozilla Topicbox-Message-UUID: 7c48e760-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 Hi folks, I'm now thinking about changing mozilla to use webfs instead of its own protocol handling for quite some while (the whole caching machinery should also be kicked off in this process and delegated to either an local proxy like wwwoffle or implemented in webfs). The big question to me now is: can webfs already handle everything that a full-blown browser needs ? For example, https and certificates ? How can the necessary information be accessed at the right time, eg. for things like asking the user whether to accept some cert, etc. In longer terms, I'd also replace mozilla's handling of other protocols, eg. ftp, by an webfs implementation. What do you think about this ? cu -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Enrico Weigelt, metux IT service -- http://www.metux.de/ phone: +49 36207 519931 email: weigelt@metux.de mobile: +49 151 27565287 icq: 210169427 skype: nekrad666 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Embedded-Linux / Portierung / Opensource-QM / Verteilte Systeme ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: erik quanstrom Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2010 15:56:10 -0500 To: weigelt@metux.de, 9fans@9fans.net Message-ID: <6ffd8b5d521bfd9d7ed408e159e4c226@plug.quanstro.net> In-Reply-To: <20101113190805.GA22589@nibiru.local> References: <20101113190805.GA22589@nibiru.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [9fans] webfs + mozilla Topicbox-Message-UUID: 7c5e3f20-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 > In longer terms, I'd also replace mozilla's handling of other > protocols, eg. ftp, by an webfs implementation. > > > What do you think about this ? webfs is client side, not server side. - erik From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <6ffd8b5d521bfd9d7ed408e159e4c226@plug.quanstro.net> References: <20101113190805.GA22589@nibiru.local> <6ffd8b5d521bfd9d7ed408e159e4c226@plug.quanstro.net> Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2010 15:12:13 -0800 Message-ID: From: David Leimbach To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6464d1a61bc830494f756cc Subject: Re: [9fans] webfs + mozilla Topicbox-Message-UUID: 7c983dce-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 --0016e6464d1a61bc830494f756cc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 12:56 PM, erik quanstrom wrote: > > In longer terms, I'd also replace mozilla's handling of other > > protocols, eg. ftp, by an webfs implementation. > > > > > > What do you think about this ? > > webfs is client side, not server side. > > - erik > > I must confess, I understood the question more than this comment. Why not use webfs for Mozilla? How much code could be saved by re-using the webfs service? --0016e6464d1a61bc830494f756cc Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 12:56 PM, erik q= uanstrom <qua= nstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
> In longer terms, I'd also replace mozilla's = handling of other
> protocols, eg. ftp, by an webfs implementation.
>
>
> What do you think about this ?

webfs is client side, not server side.

- erik

I must confess, I understood the question more th= an this comment.

Why not use webfs for Mozilla? =A0How m= uch code could be saved by re-using the webfs service?
--0016e6464d1a61bc830494f756cc-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <7610a707514935cd1b90d4cc5ca62502@quintile.net> From: "Steve Simon" Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2010 09:44:34 +0000 To: weigelt@metux.de, 9fans@9fans.net In-Reply-To: <20101113190805.GA22589@nibiru.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [9fans] webfs + mozilla Topicbox-Message-UUID: 7da5b160-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 I have been working on some improvments to webfs which I shall push out very soon. Webfs is good as far as it goes, but it is missing some things, different content encodings (gzip etc) and persistent sessions are the most obvious ones. Basicially it is an http 1.0 client which has some 1.1 extensions, probably nothing like enough for what you want. It does support https, ftp, certificates however. there is also no cache built into webfs, this might be a good idea, though perhaps the cache should be seperate, I haven't worked out the right way to do this yet. (anyone ?) -Steve