Hello, In this case why leave this code: //not strictly needed new File(CACERT).delete();
As reading it I understand it is not an issue if delete fails? while in fact it is ? On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 10:46 PM, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: > On 8 September 2013 21:39, <[email protected]> wrote: > > Author: pmouawad > > Date: Sun Sep 8 20:39:35 2013 > > New Revision: 1520921 > > > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1520921 > > Log: > > Test for existence before trying to delete (thanks sebb) > > > > Modified: > > jmeter/trunk/src/jorphan/org/apache/jorphan/exec/KeyToolUtils.java > > > > Modified: > jmeter/trunk/src/jorphan/org/apache/jorphan/exec/KeyToolUtils.java > > URL: > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/jmeter/trunk/src/jorphan/org/apache/jorphan/exec/KeyToolUtils.java?rev=1520921&r1=1520920&r2=1520921&view=diff > > > ============================================================================== > > --- jmeter/trunk/src/jorphan/org/apache/jorphan/exec/KeyToolUtils.java > (original) > > +++ jmeter/trunk/src/jorphan/org/apache/jorphan/exec/KeyToolUtils.java > Sun Sep 8 20:39:35 2013 > > @@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ public class KeyToolUtils { > > public static void generateProxyCA(File keystore, String password, > int validity) throws IOException { > > keystore.delete(); // any existing entries will be invalidated > anyway > > // not strictly needed > > - if(!new File(CACERT).delete()) { > > + if(new File(CACERT).exists() && !new File(CACERT).delete()) { > > I still think it's better to leave the failure reporting to the gencert > command. > > e.g. if the CACERT file is read-only, we will now get a warning and an > error. > > > // Noop as we accept not to be able to delete it > > log.warn("Could not delete file:"+new > File(CACERT).getAbsolutePath()+", will continue ignoring this"); > > } > > > > > -- Cordialement. Philippe Mouawad.
