urlcache: what all are you working on?

Piotr Caban piotr at codeweavers.com
Thu Apr 5 14:04:10 CDT 2012


Hi,

It's hard to divide the work in any ways right now, since all of us were 
looking for bugs and fixing them. Before the work may be split in any 
way, some basic problems needs to be fixed. I think we're slowly getting 
to the point when index.dat is no longer getting corrupted (of course 
there will be problems when index.dat is already damaged).

I was thinking about sending the patches I have already prepared and 
then taking a few days break, so Morten or Juan can try to get their 
patches in. I'm sure we will be able to organize future work so we don't 
overlap in any way.

On 4/5/12 7:30 PM, Juan Lang wrote:
> Another thing that'd be nice to see is reducing the amount of disk
> space used.  Morten, some of the patches you sent me do some of that,
> by removing files once they're no longer in use.  (The patches I have
> do that too.)  Piotr, were you planning to address this too?
I've seen some patches written by Morten regarding it and I have some 
concerns. I think that wininet may delete the index.dat file if it's 
corrupted or file version is not matching, but it can't remove files 
that don't belong to it (in this patches whole cache directory was 
removed when cache file version was changing). The bad thing is, that 
people with old wine prefixes will need to remove downloaded files by 
hand (I think it's the correct approach).

Later when the cache is working correctly, it should be responsible for 
removing the files that it is keeping track of (so the manual cache 
clearing should be a one time process). I was not investigating it yet, 
but it shouldn't be very hard to implement.

> A question that I have to ask is, would be better to eliminate the url
> cache altogether?  Right now its only utility is to pass test cases,
> and conveniently fill up your disk.  No requests are ever fulfilled
> from the cache.  Either of you have any plans to tackle that?
Eliminating the cache is clearly not the correct approach. First of all 
urlmon already depends on it. It needs the files to be created, the 
problem is that we never delete them. Correct persist cookies support 
can't be implemented without it. Some applications are using it 
directly. Other parts of wine can't depend on index.dat related 
functionality as long as it's broken.

Cheers,
Piotr



More information about the wine-devel mailing list