On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 08:59:49AM +0200, Johannes Hofmann wrote:
On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 09:59:09PM -0300, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote:
[...]
I have two pages you can test on - one with the proper meta tag, and one with out:
http://irpi.linicks.net:8080/static_simple.html <- good
http://fishpi.linicks.net:8081/static_simple.html <- bad - that shows the bug
If possible view both with that printf I put in - you can see what mr_url returns.
Please try to be clear & concise.
There's a bug, yes. You may try this:
diff -r c20e74568504 src/html.cc --- a/src/html.cc Sun May 01 10:49:17 2016 -0300 +++ b/src/html.cc Sun May 01 23:26:48 2016 -0300 @@ -3220,6 +3220,8 @@ static void Html_tag_open_meta(DilloHtml content = p + strlen("url="); else if ((p = strstr(content, ";"))) content = p + strlen(";"); + else + content = ""; /* Handle the case of a quoted URL */ if (*content == '"' || *content == '\'') { if ((p = strchr(content + 1, *content)))
@Johannes, does it look OK to you?
Looks ok to me, but the whole code there is a bit hairy.
Yes. This stems from two reasons: the meta-refresh element has no defined standard, and our code has evolved accomodating to work with what we've found along the way. Do you have a testcase battery for meta refresh? Currently, I'm working on the BODY and HTML element handling by the parser (special cases since their implicit optional-magic open and close). Fortunately I have the test cases for BODY and HTML. I also found my old set for META refresh, but I don't have the case you made the last patch for. It would be great to consolidate them. -- Cheers Jorge.-