On Thu, 3 Dec 2009, Kamil Dudka wrote:

> I compared the test logs of test513 on a working machine and s390. The only
> difference is this:
>
> --- log/check-expected 2009-12-03 13:20:44.000000000 -0500
> +++ log/check-generated 2009-12-03 13:20:44.000000000 -0500
> @@ -1,6 +0,0 @@
> -POST /513 HTTP/1.1
> -Host: 127.0.0.1:8990
>
> curl.log, server.input, stderr513 are the some in both cases.

That's certainly curious. And isn't server.input looking pretty much like that
POST request it wanted?

> How is the file "log/check-generated" actually generated?

All file checks that runtests.pl does between what a test should get and what
it gets is run through a function and that function generates
log/check-expected to look like what to expect and log/check-generated to
contain what was just gotten. They do variable expansion and so on. If the two
files are not equal, something is wrong.

The same kind of check is done for several different things, so the
information showed just before on the test output provides the key for what
was actually tested when it failed to match.

> If the file is generated from stderr513, then it looks like a perl bug to me.

No, it's taken from server.input which is the raw data sent the test HTTP
server writes down to show the full request. But that's just equally strange
as from what I understand on your description the server.input files looked
the same in both the working and the non-working case.

> But I still can't image how such a bug could be specific to test513.

No, I too have a hard time to see how this happens... These cases tend to be
very hard without actually being able to login and run and debug these things
hands-on. They can in fact still be tricky even then!

-- 
  / daniel.haxx.se
-------------------------------------------------------------------
List admin: http://cool.haxx.se/list/listinfo/curl-library
Etiquette:  http://curl.haxx.se/mail/etiquette.html