Hi again, After a couple of fixes, this exception handling should be working in trunk now.
Atsushi Eno On 2010/03/25 19:24, Matt Dargavel wrote: > Thanks for the explanation, I had a feeling it wouldn't be as simple as > I was hoping it was. :-) > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Atsushi Eno [mailto:atsushi...@veritas-vos-liberabit.com] >> Sent: 25 March 2010 4:12 AM >> To: Matt Dargavel >> Cc: mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com >> Subject: Re: [Mono-dev] [PATCH] WCF more detail on Destination >> > Unreachable > >> Thanks for the test, it cleared some things up :) >> >> So - first, I cannot apply your HttpRequestChannel change. The code >> > you > >> removed was introduced to fix real problem regarding HTTP 4xx; when >> HTTP 4xx is returned, the response stream is inaccessible and the >> > channel > >> should not try to read it. >> >> Instead, the server code seems to have an issue that it should just >> return 500. While it is set to 400 at HttpRequestContext with explicit >> comment that "it is what .NET does", I was likely wrong by seeing >> response from WebHttpBinding, which likely has special error handling. >> >> In general our fault handling is not well done yet and I'm seeing a >> couple of issues to get correct fix there. Better fault handling is >> > one > >> of the tasks on my stack, but it may be time to give priority than >> ongoing bugfix as it's blocking your patch that will help my ongoing >> work... >> >> Atsushi Eno >> >> >> On 2010/03/24 19:41, Matt Dargavel wrote: >> >>> Apologies for the wait- it's the time difference! :-) >>> >>> I've come up with a test for the DestinationUnreachable patch. When >>> > I > >>> was doing my testing I was using a combination of a .NET client and >>> manually firing in requests using PuTTY and examining the reply. >>> > When I > >>> use a WCF Client in Mono the exception detail is currently lost in >>> HttpRequestChannel, with a WebException being returned instead. >>> >>> The patch I've attached changes HttpRequestChannel so that 400+ >>> > errors > >>> are returned normally. This results in a FaultException being >>> > returned > >>> instead. The FaultException includes the extra details my previous >>> patch added. >>> >>> Do you think this is acceptable and covers what you need? Hopefully >>> you'll be able to add it to the NUnit tests fairly easily. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Matt. >>> >>> >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Atsushi Eno [mailto:atsushi...@veritas-vos-liberabit.com] >>>> Sent: 24 March 2010 6:18 AM >>>> To: Matt Dargavel >>>> Cc: mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com >>>> Subject: Re: [Mono-dev] [PATCH] WCF more detail on Destination >>>> >>> Unreachable >>> >>>> Instead of waiting for your reply, I've rather committed the patch >>>> >>> (with >>> >>>> a few change) and verify it later with a runnable repro. -> >>>> DestinationUnreachableInfo.patch is done >>>> >>>> Atsushi Eno >>>> >>>> On 2010/03/24 14:35, Atsushi Eno wrote: >>>> >>>>> I still couldn't reproduce the detailed error message. Let's >>>>> > please > >>> post >>> >>>>> a runnable repro case instead of code-less explanation ;) >>>>> >>>>> Atsushi Eno >>>>> >>>>> On 2010/03/23 22:38, Matt Dargavel wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> You can reproduce it by requesting an operation that doesn't >>>>>> > exist. > >>> (It >>> >>>>>> was happening before I implemented the two Service Contracts on >>>>>> > one > >>> end >>> >>>>>> point change as the wrong channel dispatcher was getting the >>>>>> >>> request.) >>> >>>>>> So I should be able to write a test case for that... >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: Atsushi Eno [mailto:atsushi...@veritas-vos-liberabit.com] >>>>>>> Sent: 23 March 2010 12:57 PM >>>>>>> To: Matt Dargavel >>>>>>> Cc: mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] WCF more detail on Destination Unreachable >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It's looking fine, but how did you check your change? (I know it >>>>>>> >>> could >>> >>>>>>> happen not always reproducible, so that's okay if it's not >>>>>>> > really > >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> always >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> reproducible.) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> BTW I thank a lot for your properties change, that fixed a bug >>>>>>> >>> that >>> >>>>>>> annoyed me today ;-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Atsushi Eno >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 2010/03/23 20:28, Matt Dargavel wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> A patch to return more detail when an endpoint / operation >>>>>>>> > isn't > >>>>>>>> found. Not sure if you'll want to apply this, but it helped in >>>>>>>> >>> some >>> >>>>>>>> service debugging I was doing. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Matt. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Mono-devel-list mailing list >>>>> Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com >>>>> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> > > > _______________________________________________ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list