If possible please run jstack on the process running the junit test and post
the output.
Try "jstack -l <pid>" if that doesn't work, try "jstack -F -m -l <pid>"

This will print out the stack trace for all threads in the process.

-Tad

On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 11:02 AM, Dudley Fox <[email protected]> wrote:

> Tad  et al.,
>
> I set the IP and port to 127.0.0.1 and 9876 respectively. The test still
> hangs, and the output of netstat is as follows:
> [~]$ netstat -an
> Active Internet connections (including servers)
> Proto Recv-Q Send-Q  Local Address          Foreign Address       (state)
> tcp4       0      0 192.168.1.30.22        192.168.1.194.1126
> ESTABLISHED
> tcp4       0      0 127.0.0.1.40694        127.0.0.1.9876         CLOSED
> tcp4       0      0 127.0.0.1.34084        *.*                    LISTEN
> tcp4       0      0 *.28017                *.*                    LISTEN
> tcp4       0      0 *.27017                *.*                    LISTEN
> tcp4       0      0 127.0.0.1.1616         *.*                    LISTEN
> tcp4       0      0 127.0.0.1.25           *.*                    LISTEN
> tcp4       0      0 *.22                   *.*                    LISTEN
> tcp6       0      0 *.22                   *.*                    LISTEN
> udp4       0      0 *.514                  *.*
> udp6       0      0 *.514                  *.*
>
> You can see that the socket on 9876 is closed, but that has been the status
> for over 12 hours, and the test is still hung. I'll keep poking at it to
> see
> if there is anything I can discover. I am willing to try and reasonable
> suggestions of anyone has an idea of what is going wrong.
>
> Thanks,
> Dudley
>
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 6:50 PM, Dudley Fox <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > 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