Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 8 years ago
This is a difficult situation; the short answer for this is "Im working on it,
but
don't hold your breath". The long answer is this:
The way Avalanche works (and in fact all rtorrent web UIs) is to use CURL to
fetch
data from the exposed RPC service sitting on Apache (or webserver X). The
difficulty
lies here. If I were to somehow solve the socket problem, and that in itself is
a big
if (which has been on my mind since day 1 btw), then there would be such a
radical
codebase change it would become a different project in itself. As much code
went into
the XMLRPC interface would go into Sockets (if not more), so >1000 lines of
code.
For now, you *have* to have rtorrent exposed to a web server at the least.
However,
you can secure the web server end by using Auth BASIC (Tested) or Auth DIGEST
(Untested). On Apache, you still have to expose the rtorrent scgi (by giving it
a
port), which is a real shame.
However, you CAN use socket based RPC by using an alternative web server.
Apache's
RPC server doesn't support sockets, but Cherokee's, NginX's and Lighttpd's
servers
all do. So feel free to use those. I am currently using Cherokee, which works
flawlessly (and is incredibly easy to setup) with rtorrent's socket interface.
As
said above, couple this with some kind of Auth and you've minimised rtorrent's
exposure to the web.
Hope this gives you enough of an answer.
Original comment by keitha...@gmail.com
on 4 May 2010 at 7:24
I'm using lighttpd and rtgui and they work perfectly.Unless i am missing a
setting on
Avalanche,it does not function at all(no error messages either).Using the same
configuration(lighttpd,rtorrent) and loading rtgui works.But now with avalanche.
Here is a patchset which enables rtgui to use sockets.Perhaps you could look at
it
and see how the author did it and adapt it to Avalanche.
http://groups.google.com/group/rtgui/browse_thread/thread/6543b30db28ab72e?pli=1
Original comment by jwwolf
on 4 May 2010 at 7:58
Excellent work! I'll have a look. I've pushed it forward to 0.9 Final so in
theory you
should see it implemented in a month or so.
Original comment by keitha...@gmail.com
on 4 May 2010 at 8:19
Original comment by keitha...@gmail.com
on 7 Jun 2010 at 8:08
Awesome!
Original comment by hlpimfal...@gmail.com
on 17 Jun 2010 at 5:20
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
jwwolf
on 4 May 2010 at 6:59