GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 654979
Add simple gssdp discoverer tool
Last modified: 2019-02-22 05:57:42 UTC
Add gssdp-discover, a simple command line tool to issue M-SEARCH requests for specific targets
Created attachment 192319 [details] [review] Add simple gssdp discoverer tool
Looks good. Just one thing: Since the tool can't do anything without the target option, I suggest you make that a required argument instead.
(In reply to comment #2) > Looks good. Just one thing: Since the tool can't do anything without the target > option, Yes it does, as the help says: + { "target", 't', 0, G_OPTION_ARG_STRING, &target, "SSDP TARGET to search for (default: ssdp:all)"
(In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #2) > > Looks good. Just one thing: Since the tool can't do anything without the target > > option, > > Yes it does, as the help says: > > + { "target", 't', 0, G_OPTION_ARG_STRING, &target, "SSDP TARGET to > search for (default: ssdp:all)" Ah! In that case, just add a print telling user that we are doing something. E.g Searching for SSDP resource(s) 'TARGET'. Oh and one more thing. This tool isn't using any gssdp internal api, right? If so, we better put it in gupnp-tools. Thats the only reason device-sniffer isn't in gupnp-tools.
(In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #3) > > (In reply to comment #2) > > > Looks good. Just one thing: Since the tool can't do anything without the target > > > option, > > > > Yes it does, as the help says: > > > > + { "target", 't', 0, G_OPTION_ARG_STRING, &target, "SSDP TARGET to > > search for (default: ssdp:all)" > > Ah! In that case, just add a print telling user that we are doing something. > E.g Searching for SSDP resource(s) 'TARGET'. > > Oh and one more thing. This tool isn't using any gssdp internal api, right? If > so, we better put it in gupnp-tools. Thats the only reason device-sniffer isn't > in gupnp-tools. Ok, I thought the split was gssdp vs. gupnp. Will move there.
Created attachment 192857 [details] [review] Add gssdp-discover tool A simple tool that scans the network for a given resource.
Review of attachment 192857 [details] [review]: Except for the '{}' around single-line blocks, looks good.
(In reply to comment #7) > Review of attachment 192857 [details] [review]: > > Except for the '{}' around single-line blocks, looks good. Fixed and pushed.