On 12 August 2013 16:37, Milamber <[email protected]> wrote: > > Le 12/08/2013 15:00, sebb a ecrit : > >> On 9 August 2013 19:25, Milamber <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Le 09/08/2013 17:19, sebb a ecrit : >>> >>>> On 9 August 2013 10:43, Milamber <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Le 08/08/2013 20:43, sebb a ecrit : >>>>>> >>>>>> [snip] >>>>>> >>>>>> - private static final String DEVICE_PREFIX = "/dev/"; >>>>>> + private static final String DEVICE_PREFIX = "/"; >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This changes introduce an regression, /dev/eth0 don't works now. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yes, that was deliberate. I changed the docs accordingly. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You need to use /eth0. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> /eth0 don't works, but /ipv4/eth0 works. >>>>>> >>>>>> That should work - it works for me on Win/XP. >>>>>> >>>>>> Add some debug and see why it's not working. >>>>>> >>>>>>> Seems very complicated to find the good syntax (without read the docs >>>>>>> or >>>>>>> with "IP source address" label only) >>>>>> >>>>>> Where else apart should it be described? >>>>>> >>>>>>> Why not use a regexp pattern to check IPv4 and IPv6 address? without >>>>>>> a >>>>>>> ipvX >>>>>>> prefix ? >>>>>> >>>>>> Not sure I understand. >>>>>> >>>>>>> And why not considering if the ipSource (as is) isn't a IP address >>>>>>> (4/6), >>>>>>> and not is in the interface's list on host, then it's a hostname, >>>>>>> else >>>>>>> return an error. >>>>>>> Therefore it's not necessary to have special prefix to fill the >>>>>>> field. >>>>>> >>>>>> Two issues: >>>>>> - if the interface name is checked first, it will override the >>>>>> identical hostname, which could cause existing tests to fail (not all >>>>>> that likely, but possible) >>>>>> - if the name is not an interface, the check is unnecessary >>>>>> >>>>>> That's why I chose a prefix that cannot be present in a host name. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Ok, in this case, perhaps, a (better?) solution is to provide a combo >>>>> box >>>>> to >>>>> allow the user to choice the source address field. >>>> >>>> I was trying to avoid increasing the complexity of the GUI. >>>> >>>> It's a fairly unusual use-case, so I took the view that the user would >>>> not mind putting up with a slightly unusual syntax. >>>> >>>>> With the combo box, the user could use the common / usual name for >>>>> their >>>>> device (only eth0, wlan0, etc.), IP or hostname (short or fdqn) >>>>> >>>>> Here a screenshot of HTTP Request with some improvements for reduce the >>>>> width screen size (font changes for the Optional panel and HTTP >>>>> options) >>>>> + >>>>> the Src IP combo box. >>>>> http://www.milamberspace.net/img/http-request-src-addr.png >>>> >>>> The IPv4/6 addr entries are ambiguous. >>>> Do they apply only to devices? >>>> I would hope so, otherwise existing test plans will break. >>>> In which case, the entries need to be renamed. >>>> >>>> The field currently supports Hostname or IP address; it is important >>>> that compatibilty is maintained. >>>> >>>> So the first entry should be for the Hostname/IP addr. >>>> The entries need to be something like: >>>> >>>> Hostname/IP >>>> Device >>>> Device IPv4 >>>> Device IPv6 >>>> >>>>> I can commit the UI changes for reduce the minimal width of the HTTP >>>>> Request's pane, >>>> >>>> Although the GUI is roughly the same width, it is more complicated. >>> >>> >>> I can reduce the font size (12 to 11 or 10) to reduce more the width for >>> the >>> http options. >>> Or reduce the text (like removing the 2 "Use" word): >>> [ ] Redirect Automatically [ ] Floww Redirects [ ] Use KeepAlive [ ] >>> Use >>> multipart/form-data for POST [ ] Browser-compatible headers >>> >>> >>> >>>>> and if your are agree the changes to add the combo box? >>>> >>>> I'm not convinced the change makes it easier for the user. >>>> There would be two fields to configure instead of one. >>>> >>>> The fields should be enclosed in a box so that it is clear they are >>>> related. >>>> For example, as is done for Web Server & Timeouts. >>>> >>>> Maybe the "Embedded URLs must match" field should also have a border. >>> >>> >>> Like this: >>> http://www.milamberspace.net/img/http-request-src-addr-v2.png >> >> Not quite. >> >> Embedded URLs is also an optional task. Whether we still need that >> heading or not is another matter. >> But it's wrong to exclude them from the heading if it is present. >> >> It's good to have all the embedded stuff in a single box. >> But the source address and associated drop-down must also be in their own >> box. > > > See: > http://www.milamberspace.net/img/http-request-src-addr-v3a.png > or > http://www.milamberspace.net/img/http-request-src-addr-v3b.png > or > http://www.milamberspace.net/img/http-request-src-addr-v3c.png > or > http://www.milamberspace.net/img/http-request-src-addr-v3d.png > > 3c seems be the best UI?
3c (but 3d is OK too). > > > >> >>> >>> >>>>> (please note, the rename of Source IP address field) >>>> >>>> That's OK. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I thought it was awkard to use /dev/ipv6/eth0, so I collapsed the >>>>>>>> prefix >>>>>>>> to "/". >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> + private static final String IPV4 = "ipv4/"; >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> [snip] >>> >>> >> . >> >
