From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from resqmta-ch2-10v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-ch2-10v.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:42]) by hurricane.the-brannons.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CD95D77D0D for ; Wed, 23 Dec 2015 11:07:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from resomta-ch2-09v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.105]) by resqmta-ch2-10v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id x77R1r0022GyhjZ0177npL; Wed, 23 Dec 2015 19:07:47 +0000 Received: from eklhad ([IPv6:2601:405:4001:e487:21e:4fff:fec2:a0f1]) by resomta-ch2-09v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id x77m1r00W2MDcd70177ngk; Wed, 23 Dec 2015 19:07:47 +0000 To: Edbrowse-dev@lists.the-brannons.com From: Karl Dahlke Reply-to: Karl Dahlke References: <20151123100928.eklhad@comcast.net> <20151223184500.GB2992@hob.adamthompson.me.uk> User-Agent: edbrowse/3.6.0+ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2015 14:07:46 -0500 Message-ID: <20151123140746.eklhad@comcast.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20140121; t=1450897667; bh=lf/kgrkY30V5vEKae/2VrZVyd2Zkh0UteP5oZcWXokM=; h=Received:Received:To:From:Reply-to:Subject:Date:Message-ID: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=mryRP4jX6u7Q584Y81trb75an+5XY31JjQBdKFPX6NdjZUneISjbcaKkiYBGNrU5A hfcnS1aq/VO+RAWHzdtGfyZmVtq3eLKv7oBm9lUDmvBpYEl78aD/6YohC+56qhEFFu rQ4a7MdSLWTW4s5PBgGMP/rf8zd1u6YmrdFh8dh41z1ughovVzTqr93WW7C5I9xSmX XFUIZKMH/Wvf88t9lNQtX8t336ZvoHij/QjHBLtccV7pqn6VQiAnmQFSmy2LZ6jBp9 7BzLkEyoXW9H+GGOb3qbvKdixLde+ZBCR2Fv1ZLIYe7mSjXXXIPNvnlxoJiASeLcfB EA95uHTWe8t9Q== Subject: [Edbrowse-dev] One program Two processes X-BeenThere: edbrowse-dev@lists.the-brannons.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Edbrowse Development List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2015 19:07:37 -0000 > certainly about the suggested "thread safe" design. The two threads would run separately in time, logically, because the protocol is the same, one thread is always waiting for a message from the other. Just as the two processes are essentially serialized. They never really run in parallel. Both threads will not run httpConnect at the same time, for example, it just won't happen. So I'm not too worried about threadsafe nightmares. Still, we can keep the processes separate for a while as we think through the various implications. No problem. Only step so far is making one image, which gives us, when making xhr or whatever, all the power of edbrowse. Call httpConnect and you'll have the network of proxies and certificates, the cookies in the cookie jar, etc. > I'm now regularly seeing edbrowse-js seg faults again, Well if you have a website ... would love to track this down. Karl Dahlke