On Tue 07 Apr 2009 at 07:29PM, johan...@sun.com wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 05:46:46PM -0700, Dan Price wrote:
> > On Tue 07 Apr 2009 at 04:48PM, johan...@sun.com wrote:
> > > Folks,
> > >
> > > This morning Shawn and I tracked down a problem with the depot's error
> > > handling. At some point in the recent past, the catalog stopped
> > > returning a 304 error when the client requested an incremental update,
> > > and no further updates were available.
> > >
> > > Shawn and I have been going over the fix offline, but I wanted to post
> > > the webrev here, in case anyone else wants to take a look.
> > >
> > > http://cr.opensolaris.org/~johansen/webrev-8010/
> >
> > Any test cases to be written here?
>
> I just added one, fixed a test that broke, and updated the webrev.
>
> It's in the same location, since the change was small and obvious.
I hate to be a pain, but while you're there, could you please also
test the inverse?
In other words, can you subtract 10 from the time, and check that we get
a 200 back with some contents and not a 304?
+ # check that we do not get a 304 if the client is out of date
+ # with respect to the server.
+ hdr = {"If-Modified-Since": lm - 10}
+ c, v = misc.versioned_urlopen(depot_url, "catalog", [0],
headers=hdr)
If that's bogus, or too hard for some reason I haven't thought of, then
you can skip. Just seemed like an easy thing to add.
-dp
--
Daniel Price, Solaris Kernel Engineering http://blogs.sun.com/dp
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
pkg-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
