Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 49855 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2006 18:32:08 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 20 Nov 2006 18:32:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 94214 invoked by uid 500); 20 Nov 2006 18:32:13 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-dev-archive@tomcat.apache.org Received: (qmail 94156 invoked by uid 500); 20 Nov 2006 18:32:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@tomcat.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Tomcat Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@tomcat.apache.org Received: (qmail 94145 invoked by uid 99); 20 Nov 2006 18:32:13 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 20 Nov 2006 10:32:13 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (herse.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [206.123.111.90] (HELO mail.loukasmgmt.com) (206.123.111.90) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 20 Nov 2006 10:32:00 -0800 Received: (qmail 23514 invoked by uid 510); 20 Nov 2006 12:25:54 -0600 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.3?) (smtp@loukasmgmt.com@71.252.229.244) by mail.loukasmgmt.com with SMTP; 20 Nov 2006 12:25:54 -0600 Message-ID: <4561F480.6060302@hanik.com> Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 12:31:28 -0600 From: Filip Hanik - Dev Lists User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (Windows/20061025) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tomcat Developers List Subject: Re: svn commit: r477251 - /tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk/java/org/apache/catalina/connector/Response.java References: <20061120164704.CE5F41A9846@eris.apache.org> <4561EE3D.3080805@apache.org> In-Reply-To: <4561EE3D.3080805@apache.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org I figured :). I'll revert and hunt down the root cause. My guess is that if the response was used with output stream first, then recycled and then used again, somehow the conv ends up being null and causes a NPE in the write method. Filip Remy Maucherat wrote: > fhanik@apache.org wrote: >> Author: fhanik >> Date: Mon Nov 20 08:47:03 2006 >> New Revision: 477251 >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=477251 >> Log: >> TCK correction, depending on the sequence of the tests, the converter >> turns out to be null at certain times. >> Added in a check to create the converter even when getting the output >> stream. > > I have to veto this. It's using the output stream in that case, so why > does it matter if the converter (= the character encoder) is null ? > > Rémy > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org