Closed
Bug 747929
Opened 12 years ago
Closed 12 years ago
tstclnt "ping" (-q) shouldn't require an NSS database, introduce ping timeout parameter
Categories
(NSS :: Tools, defect)
Tracking
(Not tracked)
RESOLVED
FIXED
3.14
People
(Reporter: KaiE, Assigned: KaiE)
References
Details
Attachments
(1 file, 2 obsolete files)
14.06 KB,
patch
|
rrelyea
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
It should be possible to use the -q : "ping to tcp/ip port" feature of tstclnt without having to provice an NSS database. (This will simplify some new test automation I'm going to propose.)
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•12 years ago
|
||
This patch simply: - moves the NSS init code further down - removes the unnecessary NSS shutdown inside the "ping and exit" code (because with the above move of code, we haven't initialized yet).
Assignee: nobody → kaie
Attachment #617491 -
Flags: review?(rrelyea)
Assignee | ||
Updated•12 years ago
|
Summary: tstclnt "ping" (-q) should not require an NSS database → tstclnt "ping" (-q) shouldn't require an NSS database
Assignee | ||
Comment 2•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 617491 [details] [diff] [review] Patch v1 I'll also need a configurable timeout parameter, so let's postpone this change until I have a new patch.
Attachment #617491 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #617491 -
Flags: review?(rrelyea)
Assignee | ||
Updated•12 years ago
|
Summary: tstclnt "ping" (-q) shouldn't require an NSS database → tstclnt "ping" (-q) shouldn't require an NSS database, introduce ping timeout parameter
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•12 years ago
|
||
Attachment #617508 -
Flags: review?(rrelyea)
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 617508 [details] [diff] [review] Patch v2 sigh. not as simple as that, because of the retry loop... (patch worked with iptables -j DROP, but still blocks with -j REJECT)
Attachment #617508 -
Flags: review?(rrelyea) → review-
Assignee | ||
Comment 5•12 years ago
|
||
Attachment #617508 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #617516 -
Flags: review?(rrelyea)
Comment 6•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 617516 [details] [diff] [review] Patch v3 r+ rrelyea. I noticed the original code is not calling PR_Cleanup() on the error paths. This is probably because the error paths aren't tested when doing mem-leak testing (which is the only reason to call PR_Cleanup() before closing. bob
Attachment #617516 -
Flags: review?(rrelyea) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•12 years ago
|
||
Checking in tstclnt/tstclnt.c; /cvsroot/mozilla/security/nss/cmd/tstclnt/tstclnt.c,v <-- tstclnt.c new revision: 1.71; previous revision: 1.70 done
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 12 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → 3.14
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•