ClientCookie bug (followup)

[Anand Pillai]

I am working on a Cookie module which works *with* urllib2 rather
than on top of it like the existing ClientCookie module. It uses
the Cookie module which comes with python standard library. 

This module is written as an extension of my Harvestman webcrawler.
The alpha code is ready. We are doing testing right now.

Details will be posted to my website at
http://members.lycos.co.uk/anandpillai within say 2 weeks or so.

-Anand


jjl at pobox.com (John J. Lee) wrote in message news:<87k79a25pi.fsf at pobox.com>...
> cartermark46 at ukmail.com (Mark Carter) writes:
> 
> > > I'll investigate further. 
> > 
> > Here are the results from running tests in ClientCookie 0.4.4.a:
>  [...]
> > The upshot of this is that load_cookie_data() now works in win 98 and
> > xp.
> > load_from_registry() works from win xp; it works from win 98 if and
> > only if you set the USERNAME environment variable.
> 
> You missed the username argument.
> 
> cookiejar.load_from_registry(username="mark")
> 
> (should only be required for win9x family)
> 
> 
> > I appreciate that all the stuff about request2 and response2 may not
> > be to your liking - but at the moment I'm just trying to figure out
> > what works, and what doesn't. We can also worry about the delayload
> > business later.
> 
> No really, I wasn't joking: you *never* need to use add_cookie_header
> / extract_cookies if you're using urllib2 (at least, I can't think of
> any possible reason to do so).  It can only break things.
> 
> 
> > What do you think about the idea of actually setting up an Aapache web
> > page to test these things 'for real'?
> 
> I've done limited testing on Windows with 'fake' cookies from a local
> Apache server, and on wine on linux.  As I said, though, I don't have
> a networked Windows OS, so it's inconvenient to test these things in a
> 'real' situation.  And my machine currently doesn't boot into Windows
> without physically switching cables around (security & obscure
> hardware issues, not software ones), which means I currently can't be
> bothered to test it on Windows :-P.  So, your feedback is appreciated.
> 
> 
> John