Code review 6870935

[Michael McMahon]

Chris,

Thanks. Agreed, except 5) is like that because a response body
follows the response headers

- Michael.
 
Christopher Hegarty -Sun Microsystems Ireland wrote:
> The actual changes look fine.
>
> I have just a few comments/questions about the test:
> 1) copyright year should be updated to 2009
> 2) I don't think s1 needs to be a field. I think it should be
>    a local in run.
> 3) Indentation of run looks a little too far.
> 4) error should be volatile.
> 5) I would have expected reply2 to end with two \r\n after the
>    Proxy-Authentication-Info value has been written.
>
> Otherwise, looks fine.
>
> -Chris.
>
> P.S. Good to see we're getting new tests for this this code :-)
>
> Michael McMahon wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Can I get the following code change reviewed please.
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~michaelm/6870935/webrev.01/
>>
>> - Michael.