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 zhanghuangzhu@gmail.com
 designates 64.233.184.228 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references;
        b=KOkf1DF5yeHlCMLVIcJFBIOFnpT9BtKz7AyK67mG0JJs/airaruSmkyjW5KaCpygvsUcY9qsv3i28fYZ+Wp5s12JcxDykvbhzWIwYGMVpzzn41XMiCDJwEVj/Le92P7nYWFNwKMY7yl+uPaVNYKn26E6MuUqq+tv74deaE1nNX4=
Message-ID: <4d0b24970704190108m6f75c438jecd4ad0a25f1ed1c@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 16:08:16 +0800
From: "Andrew Zhang" <zhanghuangzhu@gmail.com>
To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Subject: Re: [classlib][luni] new test in tests.api.java.net.SocketTest failed
 on my Windows XP sp2
In-Reply-To: <e66844de0704190043w5016d234ibf0d5d08a9566cc6@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_Part_155110_7052462.1176970096354"
References: <7273946b0704170150u10fe9f13vd430f0a3aa0399e2@mail.gmail.com>
	 <46248CBA.7010702@gmail.com>
	 <7273946b0704170216k43e3165cx30a19eb0ce27ea92@mail.gmail.com>
	 <462498F7.6050300@gmail.com> <4624B462.1030607@gmail.com>
	 <4626D9B0.4060606@gmail.com>
	 <e66844de0704190043w5016d234ibf0d5d08a9566cc6@mail.gmail.com>

------=_Part_155110_7052462.1176970096354
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

On 4/19/07, Leo Li <liyilei1979@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Personally I prefer Support_PortManager. As a tool, it can rescue us from
> choosing specific port to use. Despite of its defect, I believe it is
> possible to innovate it to fullfill our demand. From my experience, it
> works
> well on windows but has some problem on linux.
>
> Furthermore, if we would like to use a specific port but not predefined at
> compile time, as the case of Ruth, maybe we can adopt a method of ad-hoc,
> that is to try a specific port, if it is occupied, try another till it
> works.


I think at most we need a utility method:
ServerSocket NetworkUtil.startServerSocket() {
 return new ServerSocket(0);
}
Why do we need to:
1. open a server socket on free port
2. get the server socket port
3. close it
4. pass the port to the test case
5. the test case opens a server socket on this port
Isn't it the same as:
The test case opens a server socket on free port? Or did I missing
something?

On 4/19/07, Ruth Cao <ruoshen.c@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Tim Ellison wrote:
> > > Ruth Cao wrote:
> > >
> > >> You are right, Vladimir.
> > >>
> > >> It is just because the 'port' variable is set to 8080 and on some
> > >> machines this port has already been occupied.  The test case will
> pass
> > >> if we use Support_PortManager.getNextPort() on my side.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Please don't use the PortManager, just open port 0 and let the OS
> > > allocate a free port.  There are examples in the existing tests.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Tim
> > >
> > >
> > Yes, I agree that we should use port 0 in almost all the test cases.
> > However, it seems that this test case is a little bit special. It
> > requires to initialize a ServerSocket to connect 0.0.0.0 after
> > connecting localhost successfully.  If we use port 0 and 0.0.0.0 at the
> > same time, the ServerSocket constructed will be invalid.
> >
> > Thus, shall we assign a rarely-used port (e.g. 50000), or continue using
> > Support_PortManager? Any ideas? Suggestions?
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> >
> > Ruth Cao
> > China Software Development Lab, IBM
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Leo Li
> China Software Development Lab, IBM
>


-- 
Best regards,
Andrew Zhang

------=_Part_155110_7052462.1176970096354--