Tad,
I will try that change and let you know how it goes.

Thanks,
Dudley

On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Tad Glines <[email protected]> wrote:

> Try changing linke 67 in RpcTest.java from:
>           new InetSocketAddress[] {new InetSocketAddress("localhost", 0)},
> to
>
>        new InetSocketAddress[] {new InetSocketAddress("127.0.0.1", 12345)},
>
> If that fixes it, try changing "12345" back to "0".
>
> The testSimpleRpc, starts a service that binds to localhost:0. Specifying 0
> for the port is supposed to indicate to the OS that the program wants the
> OS
> to assign a random port. The test then starts a client that is supposed to
> connect to that service.
>
> It's possible that your box has localhost bound to something other than
> (127.0.0.1) or that FreeBSD does not have the 0 port behavior that other
> OSes do. It's also possible that you have some firewall rules that may be
> interfering (yes, firewall rules on the loopback interface are rare).
>
> -Tad
>
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 2:16 PM, Dudley Fox <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Doing more digging, I see it seems to be hanging in the method
> > testSimpleRpc. Has anyone else seen this?
> >
> >    [junit] Running org.waveprotocol.box.server.rpc.RpcTest
> >     [junit] junit.framework.TestListener: tests to run: 4
> >    [junit] junit.framework.TestListener: startTest(testIsStreamingRpc)
> >    [junit] junit.framework.TestListener: endTest(testIsStreamingRpc)
> >    [junit] junit.framework.TestListener: startTest(testSimpleRpc)  <---
> > hangs here until I ctrl-c the command
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Dudley
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Dudley Fox <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I am trying to get Wave in A Box up and running on FreeBSD, but when I
> > run
> > > ant it seems to hang forever on:
> > >    [junit] Running org.waveprotocol.box.server.rpc.RpcTest
> > >
> > > There are no errors, it just sits there.
> > >
> > > I am using the sun jdk1.6 installed from /usr/ports/java/jdk16.
> > >
> > > Any suggestions would be welcome.
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > > Dudley
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to