lwip-users
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lwip-users] Weird problems with CGI's and SSI


From: Daniel Berenguer
Subject: Re: [lwip-users] Weird problems with CGI's and SSI
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2010 12:16:06 +0100

Hi Bill,

I've been unable to use CGI's and SSI on my lm3s8962 either. I've
found that the CGI-SSI feature is not working with the FAT file system
so I had to abandon the idea. However, there is a much simpler way of
interacting between html and controller (gpio): just catch up the http
requests at fs_open (lmi_fs.c). There you can forward http requests
coming to a virtual folder (cgi-bin for ex) and then run your own
(API) commands based on the incoming request. enet_io shows how to do
this.

On the other hand, if you want to load dynamic data on your browser,
then fs_open just has to return the pointer to your own dynamically
created file (ie: XML file). This XML file can be loaded on the
browser through different methods (xsl, javascript, ...)

Daniel.


On 27 January 2010 23:20, Bill Yang <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hi Bill,
>
> Since you are using Luminary micro with lwIP, I would like to bother you a 
> little.
>
> I worked on a project that uses a Lminary 8962 ARM Cortex-M3 micro. I also 
> want to develop web server application based on the demo project enet_io from 
> Luminary distribution CD-ROM for my project.
>
> Since I lock the knowledge of embedded web server design, I attended Luminary 
> training seminar for embedded webserver design, and was taught how to modify 
> /fs/io_cgi.ssi file to add my needs and then use makefsfile.exe to generate a 
> fsdata image under the fs subdirectory.
>
> However I've still not got the concept. How these changes in a shtml file 
> could go and reach the device driver to drive a GPIO pin state. What the 
> relation is between the html web page and the device driver. For example, if 
> I want to control a peripheral in micro. Its API function is in the device 
> driver. How does a thread or procedure go from the html page to this API 
> function? Or maybe someone can suggest me to read something?
>
> Regards,
> Bill Yang
>
> Software Engineer
>
> direct:    +1 801.433.6354
> email:   address@hidden
>
>
> Parvus
>
> RUGGED SOLUTIONS for REAL WORLD APPLICATIONS
>
> USA – 3222 S. Washington St. | Salt Lake City, Utah 84115 | Tel. +1 
> 801.483.1533 | Fax +1 801.483.1523 |
> www.parvus.com
>
> A Member of EUROTECH GROUP
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: address@hidden [mailto:address@hidden On Behalf Of Bill Auerbach
> Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 2:30 PM
> To: 'Mailing list for lwIP users'
> Subject: RE: [lwip-users] Weird problems with CGI's and SSI
>
> I did try to get it to run once but it didn't run as is.  I took out the 
> hardcoded address used in the code and it still didn't run.  I had other more 
> pressing things to do.  I do have the luminary development kit and the web 
> server demo is nice.  From reading that httpd code, it is decent and the 
> functionality is there for both CGI and SSI - supporting one or both.  The 
> callback mechanism to get data from the application was done well and not 
> hard coded into the source code.
>
> If it was changed and made to work on generic lwIP installs, can it be put in 
> the contrib. section?  Or is that only with Luminary's permission?
>
> Bill
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: address@hidden
>>[mailto:address@hidden On
>>Behalf Of address@hidden
>>Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 4:04 PM
>>To: address@hidden
>>Subject: Re: [lwip-users] Weird problems with CGI's and SSI
>>
>>Bill Auerbach wrote:
>>> How does the lwIP license work in this case?  This WEB server is
>>included with a port of lwIP and includes the original copyrights and
>>acknowledgements of lwIP from the original code.  In this case, can
>>anyone legitimately/legally use this http WEB server?
>>>
>>Why not? The BSD license allows using, changing and passing on the code
>>with or without releaseing it... They left the original copyright in it
>>so that's OK I guess.
>>
>>However, I'd still favour them contributing back a better httpd than
>>what we currently have...
>>
>>Simon
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>lwip-users mailing list
>>address@hidden
>>http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lwip-users mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> lwip-users mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
>




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]