[cc'ing net-dev, we can then probably drop core-libs-dev and continue
the discussion over on net-dev]
Christos,
SOCKS is really old and not as widely deployed as other proxies. That
said, I don't have any specific problem with your proposal. SOCKS is
really in maintenance mode in the JDK, but
Changeset: 49602f599c08
Author:dxu
Date: 2013-03-27 09:00 -0700
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/49602f599c08
8010837: FileInputStream.available() throw IOException when encountering
negative available values
Summary: Remove the check in the native code to allow nega
Changeset: ae03282ba501
Author:darcy
Date: 2013-03-27 09:38 -0700
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/ae03282ba501
7185456: (ann) Optimize Annotation handling in java/sun.reflect.* code for
small number of annotations
Reviewed-by: mduigou, jfranck
! src/share/classes/s
HI Matthew,
On the face of it this makes sense. I don't have time to dig into it
this week, but I'll get stuck into it next week and get a fix together.
-Rob
On 27/03/13 00:42, Matthew Hall wrote:
Forgot to include, offending code in HttpURLConnection:
if (!method.equals("PUT") && (post
On 03/27/2013 05:22 PM, chris...@zoulas.com wrote:
Sure, I just requested a subscription to net-dev so I might not see the
first few messages. To clarify:
1. I will add socks.proxyHost and socks.proxyPort for consistency
with the other protocols, leaving as is socksProxyH
On Mar 27, 5:30pm, chris.hega...@oracle.com (Chris Hegarty) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: DefaultProxySelector socks override
| On 03/27/2013 05:22 PM, chris...@zoulas.com wrote:
| >
| > Sure, I just requested a subscription to net-dev so I might not see the
| > first few messages. To clarify:
| >
Thanks! Let me know what your opinion is, after you get a chance to look it
over.
Matthew.
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 05:25:03PM +, Rob McKenna wrote:
> HI Matthew,
>
> On the face of it this makes sense. I don't have time to dig into it
> this week, but I'll get stuck into it next week and ge
Hello
I don't see any issues with the bug, fix, and test:
before the bug, the header was set for all but PUT requests (cfr. the
evaluation)
then it was reported this should not be done for GET requests, and the
evaluation agreed on this,
so the test makes sure GET requests don't have this heade
Ah, yes. I interpreted that evaluation incorrectly too. We should be
setting the content-type for POST requests which we appear to be doing.
Furthermore user-agents must support it:
http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/interact/forms.html#h-17.13.4
-Rob
On 27/03/13 20:19, Anthony Vanelverdinghe w
But the SCEP RFC expects it to be sent without any header. How is JSCEP
supposed to do this if Java overrides it with no way to prevent the override?
--
Sent from my mobile device.
Anthony Vanelverdinghe wrote:
>Hello
>
>I don't see any issues with the bug, fix, and test:
>before the bug, the
10 matches
Mail list logo
