[Libwebsockets] two part html
andy.green at linaro.org
Wed Aug 20 00:44:26 CEST 2014
On 20 Aug 2014 05:11, "Steve Calfee" <scalfee at mqidentity.com> wrote:
> From: Andy Green <andy.green at linaro.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 12:43 PM
> To: Steve Calfee;libwebsockets at ml.libwebsockets.org
> Subject: RE: [Libwebsockets] two part html
> On 20 Aug 2014 02:08, "Steve Calfee" <scalfee at mqidentity.com> wrote:
> > ________________________________________
> > From: Andy Green <extracats at googlemail.com> on behalf of Andy Green <
andy at warmcat.com>
> > Sent: Monday, August 18, 2014 9:13 PM
> > To: Steve Calfee;libwebsockets at ml.libwebsockets.org
> > Subject: Re: [Libwebsockets] two part html
> > On 19 August 2014 10:53:37 GMT+08:00, Steve Calfee <
scalfee at mqidentity.com> wrote:
> > >Hi,
> > >
> > >I think I can do this, but I am not sure. I would like to send a html
> > >file with the lws sendfile capability. Then I want to send a string of
> > >json I built in my app as the rest of the html.
> > >
> > >I think all I have to do is when sendfile is done, return 0; then on
> > >the next http callback I can send my data. If that is true, what
> > >callback code will I get to indicate it is time for me to send my
> > >little computed data?
> > If I understood it, LWS_CALLBACK_HTTP_WRITEABLE.
> > But you will get trouble I think, if sending the file sets the content
length header the transaction is over after that much was sent.
> > -Andy
> > Hi Andy,
> > Who sets the content-length field? I don't have the source here, but I
will check it later. If it is set by the lws_sendfile routine, I guess I
cannot do it that way.
> > As a simpler example, say I split a html file arbitrarily in the
middle, into 2 files. Then in the http callback I call the lws_sendfile
routine twice. Would that work?
> > Thanks, Steve
> > Hi Andy,
> > A follow up. I can now see the source and indeed
libwebsockets_serve_http_file sets the content-length so I cannot use it to
send two parts. I will have to roll my own.
> > I don't understand the lws rules on private routines. Can I unroll the
big libwebsockets_serve_http_file by explicitly handling the start of the
send? And then use "LWS_VISIBLE int
libwebsockets_serve_http_file_fragment(..." or is that a private function
that should not be used by user level code?
> > It isn't that big a deal to do it explicitly in my code, but I always
like to reuse code from libraries if it is possible.
> It's separated out like that to indicate we'll make an effort to maintain
the public ones in a way that they still look pretty much the same if
possible in later versions.
> The private ones have no such promise they may change or disappear at any
> And it's less confusing if people can read libwebsockets.h to understand
what is available.
> I think your approach might not be the right way.
> How about put your payload in a cookie header or somesuch and just send
the file simply?
> Or if you don't send this stuff very often, pick it up in two separate
http requests at different uri paths?
> Either way your code gets simpler, more testable and more reliable.
> Hi Andy,
> I agree intentionally private stuff should stay private.
> I don't know how a user can load one web page using two separate http
once it runs can modify the page html with separately fetched content.
use it as a variable...
> The simplest way to think of it is I want a browser to get two separate
html files in one http connection. I think the only way to do this is to
read the files in the http callback and do two (or more) sends using
something very like libwebsockets_serve_http_file, but that does match my
Maybe you should load a template html file into memory and modify it
dynamically to send only one lump of html then.
Anyway good luck.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Libwebsockets