On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Lieven Govaerts <l...@apache.org> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Joe Orton <jor...@redhat.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 06:32:13PM +0200, Lieven Govaerts wrote: >>> This 204 response is not a problem, there's a special case for >>> Content-Length == 0 && code == 204 in serf (response_buckets.c). >> >> Looking at the serf (1.2.1) code, that logic isn't right, you need to >> follow the precedence in the RFC, particularly that [23]04 is dominant >> over C-L/T-E in determining message length. (I don't know whether that >> bug could manifest exactly as described here.) >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2616#section-4.4 > > You're right, that code was not completely aligned with RFC2616. Fixed > on serf trunk in r2011 and r2012. > > That can't explain this particular issue though, the 204 response had > Content-Length 0, so serf should have done the right thing. It was the > "201 Created" with Content-Length 349 that lacked the message body. > > Mark: is this still an open issue?
Do you mean if I were to use the latest Serf and SVN trunk? Once I came up with the reproduction recipe that I gave you and Mike, I have not done anything. I have been using SVN 1.7 until I hear that it is fixed. I will certainly try again when 1.8.1 and Serf releases are available to try it with. -- Thanks Mark Phippard http://markphip.blogspot.com/
