> Thanks for the review Geoff! sure :)
> > ... > >>that the appropriate status code is returned seems like a valid test >>that we would want to keep around. maybe keep this but issue another >>request to test your below logic? > > > I should have explained this... the issue is that in response to an HTTP > request on an SSL port, mod_ssl in 2.0 issues an "HTTP/0.9" response, > i.e. it just spits out the response body without headers. This makes > TestRequest.pm:lwp_call() barf. indeed. I've been bitten by that myself when trying to specifically test HTTP/0.9. http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apache-test-dev&m=102407609105935&w=2 perhaps now is a good time to fix that little bit. > > That mod_ssl bug is not really a regression worth worrying about IMO: > browsers handle the error response just fine, so I was trying to just > detect that it sent the right response body. that's legitimate, certainly. > > Now I think about it maybe a better way to fix this would be to let > lwp_call take an argument to allow it to *not* barf on an "HTTP/0.9" > response: > > if ($1 ne "1.0" && $1 ne "1.1") { > $error = "response had protocol HTTP/$1 (headers not sent?)"; > } agreed. the stuff I proposed before is just one suggestion, but perhaps you can think up a better idea. 0.9 is probably rare enough that it doesn't warrant a huge interface was my thought. > > But working out how lwp_call even gets *called* via GET gives me > headaches. Can anyone help? yeah. I actually took the time to trace through the logic not too long ago. look for the *$name = sub { my($url, $pass, $keep) = prepare(@_); local $RedirectOK = exists $keep->{redirect_ok} ? $keep->{redirect_ok} : $RedirectOK; return lwp_call($method, undef, $url, @$pass); }; logic in TestRequest.pm - it defines &$name for each of @EXPORTS, so when you call GET from foo.t you are either using the cv from lwp or A-T's own implementation if lpw isn't available. if you stick a few print statements in that subroutine, as well as prepare(), you'll see what's going on. the shortcut logic just below that is for GET_OK, GET_BODY, etc. where it threw me was the $UA global, which is an LWP::UserAgent _subclass_ object - I was looking for how the 'username => $foo' magic worked, and it turns out that get_basic_credentials() is an overridden subroutine. highly magical :) HTH --Geoff
