On Fri, 8 Jan 2010, ctf wrote:
> Thus, to me, it doesn't seem to be highly portable code
I beg to differ. The code is indeed portable but since we have very few people
interested and involved with most of the platforms you refer to, they are
rarely tested and bugs are to be expected.
> and that test isn't much better (providing only a pass-fail status, with no
> diagnostic info)
Feel free to improve it. I don't think anyone of us is satisfied with our test
suite situation!
> so I'd either complain to the maintainer
We're all reading your mails already.
> or ignore the test and pretend that the code really works, or else, if
> possible, try to find some better code somewhere else.
While you're of course free to do whatever you want, I would be very
interested to hear from you where you're going to find more portable and
better code for a library that does SSH.
Perhaps a more productive way forward is to continue helping us improving what
we have?
-- / daniel.haxx.se _______________________________________________ libssh2-devel http://cool.haxx.se/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libssh2-develReceived on 2010-01-08