[PATCH obexd v3 1/3] MAP/dummy: Actual code for folder listing retrieval

@@ -31,6 +31,8 @@
 #include <stdlib.h>
 #include <string.h>
 
+#include "log.h"
+
 #include "messages.h"
 
 static char *root_folder = NULL;

@@ -50,9 +52,68 @@ struct folder_listing_data {
 	void *user_data;
 };
 
+static char *get_next_subdir(DIR *dp, char *path)
+{
+	struct dirent *ep;
+	char *abs, *name;
+
+	for (;;) {
+		if ((ep = readdir(dp)) == NULL)
+			return NULL;
+
+		if (strcmp(ep->d_name, ".") == 0 || strcmp(ep->d_name, "..") == 0)
+			continue;
+
+		abs = g_build_filename(path, ep->d_name, NULL);
+
+		if (g_file_test(abs, G_FILE_TEST_IS_DIR)) {
+			g_free(abs);
+			break;
+		}
+
+		g_free(abs);
+	}
+
+	name = g_filename_to_utf8(ep->d_name, -1, NULL, NULL, NULL);
+
+	if (name == NULL) {
+		DBG("g_filename_to_utf8(): invalid filename");
+		return NULL;
+	}
+
+	return name;
+}
+
 static ssize_t get_subdirs(struct folder_listing_data *fld, GSList **list)
 {
-	return 0;
+	DIR *dp;
+	char *path, *name;
+	size_t n;
+
+	path = g_build_filename(fld->session->cwd_absolute, fld->name, NULL);
+	dp = opendir(path);
+
+	if (dp == NULL) {
+		int err = -errno;
+
+		DBG("opendir(): %d, %s", -err, strerror(-err));
+		g_free(path);
+
+		return err;
+	}
+
+	n = 0;
+
+	while ((name = get_next_subdir(dp, path)) != NULL) {
+		n++;
+		if (fld->max > 0)
+			*list = g_slist_prepend(*list, name);
+	}
+
+	closedir(dp);
+	g_free(path);
+
+	return n;
 }
 
 static void return_folder_listing(struct folder_listing_data *fld, GSList *list)

@@ -119,6 +119,28 @@ static ssize_t get_subdirs(struct folder_listing_data *fld, GSList **list)
 static void return_folder_listing(struct folder_listing_data *fld, GSList *list)
 {
 	struct session *session = fld->session;
+	GSList *cur;
+	uint16_t n = 0;
+	uint16_t o = 0;
+
+	/* XXX: This isn't really documented for MAP. I need to take a look how
+	 * other implementations choose to deal with parent folder.
+	 */
+	if (session->cwd[0] != 0 && fld->offset == 0) {
+		++n;
+		fld->callback(session, -EAGAIN, 0, "..", fld->user_data);
+	} else {
+		++o;
+	}
+
+	for (cur = list; o < fld->offset; ++o) {
+		cur = cur->next;
+		if (cur == NULL)
+			break;
+	}
+
+	for (; cur != NULL && n < fld->max; cur = cur->next, ++n)
+		fld->callback(session, -EAGAIN, 0, cur->data, fld->user_data);
 
 	fld->callback(session, 0, 0, NULL, fld->user_data);
 }

@@ -52,6 +52,36 @@ struct folder_listing_data {
 	void *user_data;
 };
 
+/* NOTE: Neither IrOBEX nor MAP specs says that folder listing needs to
+ * be sorted (in IrOBEX examples it is not). However existing implementations
+ * seem to follow the fig. 3-2 from MAP specification v1.0, and I've seen a
+ * test suite requiring folder listing to be in that order.
+ */
+static gint folder_names_cmp(gconstpointer a, gconstpointer b,
+						gpointer user_data)
+{
+	static const char *order[] = {
+		"inbox", "outbox", "sent", "deleted", "draft", NULL
+	};
+	struct session *session = user_data;
+	int ia, ib;
+
+	if (g_strcmp0(session->cwd, "telecom/msg") == 0) {
+		for (ia = 0; order[ia]; ++ia) {
+			if (g_strcmp0(a, order[ia]) == 0)
+				break;
+		}
+		for (ib = 0; order[ib]; ++ib) {
+			if (g_strcmp0(b, order[ib]) == 0)
+				break;
+		}
+		if (ia != ib)
+			return ia - ib;
+	}
+
+	return g_strcmp0(a, b);
+}
+
 static char *get_next_subdir(DIR *dp, char *path)
 {
 	struct dirent *ep;

@@ -113,6 +143,8 @@ static ssize_t get_subdirs(struct folder_listing_data *fld, GSList **list)
 	closedir(dp);
 	g_free(path);
 
+	*list = g_slist_sort_with_data(*list, folder_names_cmp, fld->session);
+
 	return n;
 }