ping? [RFC] [icedtea-web] reproducer for handling spaces

[Omair Majid]

On 11/03/2011 04:16 PM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
> On 11/03/2011 08:05 PM, Omair Majid wrote:
>> On 11/03/2011 02:33 PM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
>>> On 11/03/2011 05:35 PM, Omair Majid wrote:
>>>> On 11/01/2011 12:52 PM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
>>>>> Hi! This is reproducer for recently fixed PR804 and for new PR811
>>>>> (based
>>>>> on Behaviour of javaws when handling spaces).
>>>>> Currently all local-files requests test are passing (804) ( just
>>>>> one of
>>>>> them was passing before 804 patch) and all remote (811) requests are
>>>>> falling.
>>>>> Some minor changes were necessary to engine. The reproducer itself
>>>>> will
>>>>> not work without this chnages.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps we should extract scripts that prepare reproducers from the
>>>> makefile so we wont need to source NEW_LINE_IFS. What do you think?
>>>
>>> On one side I'm not sure how better will be to source extracted scripts
>>> which prepare reproducers. On the other side, I'm not sure what to
>>> imagine under "extract them". I imagine separate bash script.... What do
>>> you yourselves mean?
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I meant bash scripts. Sorry if this was not very clear.
>>
>> I am thinking of something (roughly) like this:
>> ./jnlp-reproducers --compile
>> ./jnlp-reproducers --test-all
>> ./jnlp-reproducers --test simple 'Spaces can be everywhere.jnlp'
>
> Then I imagined the same:) but I do not think it is good idea:( At the
> end number of exported makefile variables can be to large.
>

Oh, fair enough.

>>
>> Then again, I am not sure if it is really a good idea - especially the
>> bit that moves compiling instructions away from the makefile. But I
>> think it's an excellent opportunity to sneak in my idea about easily
>> being able to run a single test from the command line ;)
> But to your second "sneaking" :o) question - what exactly do you want
> (me) to improve?. Currently, i can comfortably run/debug each reproducer
> from his testsuite inside IDE (one by one or all in one ). And I can
> also easily verify the behaviour by running prepared reproducer from
> some virtual server with just compiled javaws(or again debug inisde
> IDE). What else can you want!:)

Oh, that's very cool! I was trying to debug a reproducer once and 
couldn't figure out how to do this. Would you mind explaining how you do 
this?

> Because it is so easy to run single reproducer from IDE, then i believe
> that the only problem to run it from commandline is correct setting of
> classpath.
>>
>> As for restoring IFS, you can do simple assignments in the makefile to
>> restore IFS:
>
> Actually, you can't. I do not know why, but inside mkefile, the IFS
> variable is different from shell (just space in my case, whether in
> shell contains space,\t and \n). If I'm changing it in "shell", then I
> prefer to restore it by the same way. The line you wrote, was my exactly
> first idea:)
>

Well if IFS has a different value when running under make, how is that a 
problem? As long as you set it back to the old IFS, I would expect 
things to work fine.

>> IFS=$IFS_BACKUP
>>

Typo, should be "$$IFS_BACKUP" (two $ instead of one).

Cheers,
Omair