[darcs-users] do we still need libwww support?

zooko zooko at zooko.com
Thu Mar 5 23:03:56 UTC 2009

On Mar 5, 2009, at 15:12 PM, Petr Rockai wrote:

> Nevertheless, I'd be for cutting into the wget support as well, so  
> it'd be left
> at either HTTP or libcurl. I don't think the wget stuff is  
> particularly useful
> (probably less so than libwww).

wget support actually caused a problem for my brother.  Trying to use  
darcs it took forever (probably would have taken hours) with not good  
indication of why.  Asking me for help, we added "-v -v -v --debug -- 
timing" and observed that it was because it was launching a wget  
subprocess for each patch, which took a noticeable fraction of a  
second for each one.  It turns out he had compiled this darcs  
executable himself.

Bottom line: for him, it would have been good if the compile had  
failed saying "Need libcurl or HTTP to proceed".  At least maybe  
require "--wget-fallback" as a compile option in order to enable it  
at all?  Better just to get rid of it.



More information about the darcs-users mailing list