[rfc][icedtea-web] Added reproducer for pack-gz applets

[Jie Kang]

----- Original Message -----
> On 11/12/2014 05:34 PM, Jie Kang wrote:
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> On 11/06/2014 09:04 PM, Jie Kang wrote:
> >>> Hello,
> >>>
> >>> This patch adds a reproducer to test for pack-gz applets in the three
> >>> scenarios:
> >>>
> >>> Browser - JNLP href (file)
> >>> Browser - Applet tags
> >>> Javaws - JNLP file
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> In order to pass these tests, modifications have been made to:
> >>>
> >>> 1. The test server implementation (TinyHttpdImpl) to take into account
> >>> Accept-Encoding requests and serve the correct jar files.
> >>>
> >>> 2. The PluginBridge to take into account the jnlp parameters for using
> >>> packaging or versioning in order to allow the Browser - JNLP situation to
> >>> work.
> >>>
> >>> All of this is in respect to the guidelines found here:
> >>>
> >>> http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/technotes/guides/jweb/tools/pack200.html
> >>>
> >>> Thoughts?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>>
> >>
> >> This is moreover excelent work, ty!
> >>
> >> few nits
> >> - "doNotRunInOpera" Whyyyyyy?
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> >
> > Removed. Was from the reproducer I copied off of and edited.
> >
> >> - acceptEncoding  again -why?
> >
> > Removed (from discussion on IRC).
> >
> >> - +PACKER=pack200
> >>     you should nto be lazy and use (BOOT_DIR)/bin/pack200
> >>    - is it onot in boot dir? Configure check? ..checking for pack200
> >>    ...found
> >>    and then
> >> PACKER=(PACK200).Not fund - warn that "reproducer blah balh will fail" -
> >> because if build of
> >> reproducer fail, the suite continu
> >>    - I know that this is  abit stric but may save hours later.
> >
> > Added.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> One though - looking to the changes in server and why it is cusotm one
> >>    - why not to move th elogic to serverimpl ? If (pack).gz is the
> >>    requested
> >>    file, then return result
> >> of runtome compression of this resource ?
> >
> > Changes to tinyhttpdimpl removed.
> >
> >
> > How does it look now?
> 
> 
> Looks great! Ty!
> 
> 
> I have not tested. Assuming reproducers works and:
>   - configure/make run fine (aka build dont  fail, only reproducer fail)
>
> I like the idea with substituting script :)) Really nice!
> 
> Assuming it works on jdk without pack200 (please really test) ok to head.

Hello,

When you say it works on jdk without pack200, what do you mean?

The test suite will work but the packgz test will fail. Is that okay?


Regards,

> 
>    J.
> 
> 

-- 

Jie Kang