On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 12:16:05AM -0500, Nihal Jere wrote:
> sigaction provides a more portable way of installing signals
> ---
> surf.c | 17 +
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/surf.c b/surf.c
> index 2b54e3c..65a5e66 100644
> --- a/surf.c
> ++
Here is the revised patch.
---
surf.c | 17 +
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/surf.c b/surf.c
index 2b54e3c..4ce8fdf 100644
--- a/surf.c
+++ b/surf.c
@@ -315,10 +315,21 @@ setup(void)
GIOChannel *gchanin;
GdkDisplay *gdpy;
int i, j;
+ struct sig
Hello,
I'm currently serving my static webpage with quark. I want to add some
CGI, but the opinion here about CGI support in the server is pretty
low. I'm trying to update the basecgi patch, but the latest changes
adding interruptibility seem to complicate the design (the goals of
these two are ki
Hey Jose,
I agree that the recent changes have made it more difficult to implement
CGI.
I've also wanted modify Quark to accept POST & PUT requests.
With the help of Ryzhikov's Base-CGI patch, I've come up with the
following:
https://github.com/jeremybobbin/quark
Basically, if you pass the `-x`
On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 08:52:27PM +0200, José Miguel Sánchez García wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm currently serving my static webpage with quark. I want to add some
> CGI, but the opinion here about CGI support in the server is pretty
> low. I'm trying to update the basecgi patch, but the latest change
I had HTTP basic and digest auth in mind. They both can be implemented
pretty easily without adding external dependencies and with a
reasonable amount of code. Everything more advanced is straight out of
scope for quark.
Thanks for suggesting basic! I wasn't sure about it, as it's pretty
insecure n
Currently the idea I'm most attached to is using groups as realms,
while keeping auth data in a separate file (or even hardcoded inside
config.h). I think it's a pretty elegant solution (and it would match
how I already manage shell user access to my server files), but
relying on filesystem metadat
Quoth José Miguel Sánchez García:
> Thanks for suggesting basic! I wasn't sure about it, as it's pretty
> insecure nowadays. But I acknowledge that, for quark's use cases, it
> is perfectly reasonable.
I don't think it's insecure presuming the HTTP is being served
behind some TLS connection. And
