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

[Jiri Vanek]

On 11/18/2014 03:46 PM, Jie Kang wrote:
>
>
> ----- 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?

yes
>
>
> Regards,
>
>>
>>     J.
>>
>>
>