On 05.01.2008, at 13:21, Daniel Stenberg wrote:

> But test case 1020 fails for me, and if I understood you right your
> test280 worked for you so I though that perhaps you can have a look
> at this?

Hm, the (expected) test result in the case is incomplete. Range -9 means
from index 0 to (including) index 9 which are 10 bytes, so the numbers
from
1 to 0 in this testcase.

I've no idea where the trailing 0 got lost and apologize for the
omission.

> Oh, btw if file_range() is to return a CURLcode then I think the
> caller should also check the return code. But as the function
> currently works, it always returns OK so I think we can just as well
> make it a void. What do you say?

file_range () is basically a copy of ftp_range less the setting of some
ftp related parameter. It's IMHO a candidate for refactoring and reuse.
Short: I agree. :-D

Other than that I'm fairly confident that this range patch works
correctly
because otherwise many people would be swearing at me by now.

Servus,
       Daniel
Received on 2008-01-06