Mailing-List: contact dev-help@harmony.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of gshimansky@gmail.com
 designates 64.233.182.191 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id;
        b=qQuRo1ZryBTMFYm6T5z2EcusC3dDDeY+iHz+YTKP7oZ9m/3e5/CmyRhXG7V4ORV8vV7imqmF80Dzye1Rz+l+Q/u0/SGHtIAZsfK1/VgkhjaKUeHLjC9yqODfhqomG5rd/no/rBAAmzmZfwfXDZtbQrY45w4CMDW7Ml+pLG+MrHI=
From: Gregory Shimansky <gshimansky@gmail.com>
To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Subject: Re: [classlib] Intermittent failures of UDP tests
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 01:00:59 +0300
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5
References: <51abf0750702130705n3cb3ce6aj37cbe622b0a95dcf@mail.gmail.com>
 <eqt0bc$dvk$1@sea.gmane.org>
 <51abf0750702131059h44f278c9sc5c8d6d1a57e7d22@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <51abf0750702131059h44f278c9sc5c8d6d1a57e7d22@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200702140100.59787.gshimansky@gmail.com>

On Tuesday 13 February 2007 21:59 Mikhail Markov wrote:
> > I don't quite get it. Is it operating system to be blamed or the code
> > for ServerSocket(0) which returns a port that is still used by some
>
> socket?
>
> No, the code for obtaining the available port is the following (
> tests.support.Support_PortManager):
>     ServerSocket ss = new ServerSocket(0);
>     int port = ss.getLocalPort();
>     ss.close();
>     return port;
> It works ok: creates a ServerSocket on a not-busy port, but when we try to
> use this port number somewhere in the test for creating a new Sockets, we
> get the mentioned "Address already in use" exception. Seems like the
> ServerSocket is not fully closed at the moment we're trying to use the
> generated port.

I just don't understand it why creating a socket on a non-busy port as you say 
results in an exception that it is actually still busy. Does this test behave 
in the same way on RI?

-- 
Gregory