On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 08:10:15PM +0100, PiBa-NL wrote: > Ah crap, i 'thought' i took the latest commit from the online branch. And > stopped looking properly. I must have been a few minutes to soon or > something, after i read the dev7 mail.. (and i should have checked i did > actually compile the expected version..) (which i totally didn't do in the > excitement about htx and the late time..)
Hehe :-) > > , and I think the config would be more readable > > by replacing the "frontend"+"backend" couples with a single "listen" > > for each. > Okay true, listen sections would make the config more readable :) . I'm just > used to make a frontend+backend for almost 'everything'.. (Usually i have > multiple backends behind one frontend anyhow..) And also i 'think' it shows > more clearly in the logging output if it did or didn't get passed from > frontend to the backend, but maybe thats just my imagination. No it's not your imagination, that's a good point indeed. The config is a bit less readable for tests, but I agree that logs are more precise. > However that still doesn't work yet (as also already seen by Frederic): > ---- h1 0.2 Bad exit status: 0x008b exit 0x0 signal 11 core 128 Wow, segv, it seems we still have some issues left to be addressed, thank you :-) > So i guess the question remains, is the test configured wrongly, or is some > other improvement still needed? > (I guess improvement in this case surely is needed as crashing is never the > right way, even if the input might be 'wrong'.) We definitely need to understand and fix the crash first before figuring how to improve the test, if needed at all. Thanks! Willy
