[RFC][icedtea-web] Fix for single instance service with applets using jnlp_href
Jiri Vanek
jvanek at redhat.com
Wed Sep 5 04:02:36 PDT 2012
On 09/04/2012 10:48 PM, adomurad wrote:
> Comments inline.
>
Thanx. Pushed to head and 1.3
>> So here is his patch with finished and test:
>>
...
>> + if (JNLPRuntime.isDebug()) {
>> + System.out.println("Single instance applet is already running.");
>> + }
>> + throw launchError(new LaunchException(file, ieex, R("LSFatal"), R("LCLaunching"), R("LCouldNotLaunch"), R("LSingleInstanceExists")));
> A new exception type for these calls (as you said) would probably be good.
Not done - there is already InstanceRunning exception, and Danesh have wrapped it (see ieex above)
So I'm considering it as more correct.
>> } catch (LaunchException lex) {
>> throw launchError(lex);
...
>> + }
>> + }
>> +
>> + //killer is started when params are recieved, or when application is running to long
> recieved -> received :) (nit, non-blocker)
>> + private void startKiller(int a) {
>> + synchronized (self) {
>> + if (killer == null) {
...
>> + }
>> + System.out.println("Paramaters received by SingleInstanceChecker:" + paramsString);
> paramaters -> parameters in a few places (nit, non-blocker)
Both fixed. Thanx
>>
>> + startKiller(1);
>> + }
...
>> +
>> + }
> I don't know how I feel about this main 'test'. I suppose theres no better place for it.
Ok. Kept and moved to the Javadoc of main method (as You wished?) Removed from bottom where you
didnt like it.
>> + /**
>> + *Passed /SingleInstanceTest.jnlp x /SingleInstanceTest.jnlp
>> + *Passed /SingleInstanceTest.jnlp x /SingleInstanceTestWS.jnlp
>> + *FAILED /SingleInstanceTest.jnlp x /SingleInstanceTest_jnlpHref.html - java.lang.AssertionError: SingleInstanceTest.main's first PR stdout should contain Paramaters received by SingleInstanceChecker but didn't
>> + *FAILED /SingleInstanceTest.jnlp x /SingleInstanceTest_clasical.html - java.lang.AssertionError: SingleInstanceTest.main's first PR stdout should contain Paramaters received by SingleInstanceChecker but didn't
>> + *Passed /SingleInstanceTestWS.jnlp x /SingleInstanceTest.jnlp
>> + *Passed /SingleInstanceTestWS.jnlp x /SingleInstanceTestWS.jnlp
>> + *java.lang.NoSuchMethodException: SingleInstanceTest.access$000()
>> + *FAILED /SingleInstanceTestWS.jnlp x /SingleInstanceTest_jnlpHref.html - java.lang.AssertionError: SingleInstanceTest.main's first PR stdout should contain Paramaters received by SingleInstanceChecker but didn't
>> + *FAILED /SingleInstanceTestWS.jnlp x /SingleInstanceTest_clasical.html - java.lang.AssertionError: SingleInstanceTest.main's first PR stdout should contain Paramaters received by SingleInstanceChecker but didn't
>> + *FAILED /SingleInstanceTest_jnlpHref.html x /SingleInstanceTest.jnlp - java.lang.AssertionError: SingleInstanceTest.main's first PR stdout should contain Paramaters received by SingleInstanceChecker but didn't
>> + *FAILED /SingleInstanceTest_jnlpHref.html x /SingleInstanceTestWS.jnlp - java.lang.AssertionError: SingleInstanceTest.main's first PR stdout should contain Paramaters received by SingleInstanceChecker but didn't
>> + *Passed /SingleInstanceTest_jnlpHref.html x /SingleInstanceTest_jnlpHref.html
>> + *FAILED /SingleInstanceTest_jnlpHref.html x /SingleInstanceTest_clasical.html - java.lang.AssertionError: SingleInstanceTest.main's first PR stdout should contain Paramaters received by SingleInstanceChecker but didn't
>> + *FAILED /SingleInstanceTest_clasical.html x /SingleInstanceTest.jnlp - java.lang.AssertionError: SingleInstanceTest.main's first PR stdout should contain Paramaters received by SingleInstanceChecker but didn't
>> + *FAILED /SingleInstanceTest_clasical.html x /SingleInstanceTestWS.jnlp - java.lang.AssertionError: SingleInstanceTest.main's first PR stdout should contain Paramaters received by SingleInstanceChecker but didn't
>> + *FAILED /SingleInstanceTest_clasical.html x /SingleInstanceTest_jnlpHref.html - java.lang.AssertionError: SingleInstanceTest.main's first PR stdout should contain Paramaters received by SingleInstanceChecker but didn't
>> + *Passed /SingleInstanceTest_clasical.html x /SingleInstanceTest_clasical.html
>> + */
>> +}
> Please put a comment on the top of this block or remove it ... its
> rather confusing to see when skimming the test.
>
> Fine to push assuming tests pass - the only thing that I really want
> changed before pushing is a comment before the block of Pass/FAIL's, or
> its removal. Exception could be good to add too but its up to you.
Yap they are passing everywhere except epiphany in f16 (whic is ignoring --new-tab)
>
More information about the distro-pkg-dev
mailing list