You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to c-dev@axis.apache.org by John Hawkins <HA...@uk.ibm.com> on 2005/02/22 14:50:58 UTC
IHeaderBlockTest3
Hi Folks,
this tests fails today. This test attempts to set the same attribute in a
headerblock element twice. this is not allowed. Today we do no checking to
see if it has already been set and thus we pass bad XMLfrom client to
server.
I'm not prepared to do the checking in the IHeaderBlock class to ensure
that it checks before sending the msg over the wire. When e.g WAS sees the
malformed message it returns back a good fault message saying what went
wrong. i.e. the server in this case is checking. I suggest we document to
the user what we have decided and then consider improving the object model
so that we centralise this sort of checking in a later release.
I'll do it now but any comments are welcome.
Not sure what to do about the test though. Can we remove it from the list
but kep the test as it is a valid test if we supplied that level of
function ?
regards,
John.
ant build fails on building apache modules
Posted by sanjaya singharage <sa...@opensource.lk>.
compileApache20Module:
Suspicious library name starting with "lib": libapr
Suspicious library name starting with "lib": libhttpd
[cc] 3 total files to be compiled.
[cc] Apache2Transport.cpp
[cc] D:\san\works\checkouts\head\ws-axis\c\src\server\apache2\Apache2Tran
sport.h(68) : error C2555: 'Apache2Transport::setTransportProperty' : overriding
virtual function differs from 'axiscpp::SOAPTransport::setTransportProperty' on
ly by return type or calling convention
[cc] D:\san\works\checkouts\head\ws-axis\c\src\server\apache2\../
../transport/SOAPTransport.h(199) : see declaration of 'SOAPTransport'
[cc] D:\san\works\checkouts\head\ws-axis\c\src\server\apache2\Apache2Tran
sport.h(70) : error C2555: 'Apache2Transport::setTransportProperty' : overriding
virtual function differs from 'axiscpp::SOAPTransport::setTransportProperty' on
ly by return type or calling convention
[cc] D:\san\works\checkouts\head\ws-axis\c\src\server\apache2\../
../transport/SOAPTransport.h(199) : see declaration of 'SOAPTransport'
[cc] mod_axis2.cpp
[cc] D:\san\works\checkouts\head\ws-axis\c\src\server\apache2\Apache2Tran
sport.h(68) : error C2555: 'Apache2Transport::setTransportProperty' : overriding
virtual function differs from 'axiscpp::SOAPTransport::setTransportProperty' on
ly by return type or calling convention
[cc] D:\san\works\checkouts\head\ws-axis\c\src\server\apache2\../
../transport/SOAPTransport.h(199) : see declaration of 'SOAPTransport'
[cc] D:\san\works\checkouts\head\ws-axis\c\src\server\apache2\Apache2Tran
sport.h(70) : error C2555: 'Apache2Transport::setTransportProperty' : overriding
virtual function differs from 'axiscpp::SOAPTransport::setTransportProperty' on
ly by return type or calling convention
[cc] D:\san\works\checkouts\head\ws-axis\c\src\server\apache2\../
../transport/SOAPTransport.h(199) : see declaration of 'SOAPTransport'
[cc] D:\san\works\checkouts\head\ws-axis\c\src\server\apache2\mod_axis2.c
pp(43) : error C2259: 'Apache2Transport' : cannot instantiate abstract class due
to following members:
[cc] D:\san\works\checkouts\head\ws-axis\c\src\server\apache2\Apa
che2Transport.h(55) : see declaration of 'Apache2Transport'
[cc] D:\san\works\checkouts\head\ws-axis\c\src\server\apache2\mod_axis2.c
pp(43) : warning C4259: 'int __thiscall axiscpp::SOAPTransport::setTransportProp
erty(const char *,const char *)' : pure virtual function was not defined
[cc] D:\san\works\checkouts\head\ws-axis\c\src\server\apache2\../
../transport/SOAPTransport.h(254) : see declaration of 'setTransportProperty'
[cc] D:\san\works\checkouts\head\ws-axis\c\src\server\apache2\mod_axis2.c
pp(43) : warning C4259: 'int __thiscall axiscpp::SOAPTransport::setTransportProp
erty(axiscpp::AXIS_TRANSPORT_INFORMATION_TYPE,const char *)' : pure virtual func
tion was not defined
[cc] D:\san\works\checkouts\head\ws-axis\c\src\server\apache2\../
../transport/SOAPTransport.h(233) : see declaration of 'setTransportProperty'
[cc] D:\san\works\checkouts\head\ws-axis\c\src\server\apache2\mod_axis2.c
pp(43) : error C2259: 'Apache2Transport' : cannot instantiate abstract class due
to following members:
[cc] D:\san\works\checkouts\head\ws-axis\c\src\server\apache2\Apa
che2Transport.h(55) : see declaration of 'Apache2Transport'
[cc] D:\san\works\checkouts\head\ws-axis\c\src\server\apache2\mod_axis2.c
pp(43) : warning C4259: 'int __thiscall axiscpp::SOAPTransport::setTransportProp
erty(const char *,const char *)' : pure virtual function was not defined
[cc] D:\san\works\checkouts\head\ws-axis\c\src\server\apache2\../
../transport/SOAPTransport.h(254) : see declaration of 'setTransportProperty'
[cc] D:\san\works\checkouts\head\ws-axis\c\src\server\apache2\mod_axis2.c
pp(43) : warning C4259: 'int __thiscall axiscpp::SOAPTransport::setTransportProp
erty(axiscpp::AXIS_TRANSPORT_INFORMATION_TYPE,const char *)' : pure virtual func
tion was not defined
[cc] D:\san\works\checkouts\head\ws-axis\c\src\server\apache2\../
../transport/SOAPTransport.h(233) : see declaration of 'setTransportProperty'
[cc] AttachmentHelper.cpp
[cc] Generating Code...
BUILD FAILED
D:\san\works\checkouts\head\ws-axis\c\build\buildApache20Module.xml:24: cl faile
d with return code 2
Re: IHeaderBlockTest3
Posted by James Jose <ja...@in.ibm.com>.
Hai,
A modified version of the test is included in the test list.
Regards
James
--------------------------------------------------
James Jose
Messaging Clients Team, WMQDDC
IBM Software Labs, India
Direct: 91-80- 25094331 Ext :2331
E-mail: jamejose@in.ibm.com
John Hawkins <HA...@uk.ibm.com>
22/02/2005 21:52
Please respond to
"Apache AXIS C Developers List"
To
"Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
cc
Subject
Re: IHeaderBlockTest3
Having looked into this further I stick by my first statement. The testing
we did in te other verssion of the method is now in place however, it does
not fully test the very complex scenario which the test is attempting.
I would rather we concentrate on de/serialisation issues and issues
related to unsupported types etc. than rather complex user error issues.
For now the doc and slightly upgraded testing is enough
Roshan Weerasuriya <ro...@opensource.lk>
22/02/2005 14:46
Please respond to
"Apache AXIS C Developers List"
To
Apache AXIS C Developers List <ax...@ws.apache.org>
cc
Subject
Re: IHeaderBlockTest3
hi John,
>This test attempts to set the same attribute in a headerblock element
>twice.
If the user attempt to add same attribute the method "createAttribute()"
will return NULL for all duplicate additions. I see this check in the
code.
Roshan
On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 13:50 +0000, John Hawkins wrote:
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> this tests fails today. This test attempts to set the same attribute
> in a headerblock element twice. this is not allowed. Today we do no
> checking to see if it has already been set and thus we pass bad
> XMLfrom client to server.
>
> I'm not prepared to do the checking in the IHeaderBlock class to
> ensure that it checks before sending the msg over the wire. When e.g
> WAS sees the malformed message it returns back a good fault message
> saying what went wrong. i.e. the server in this case is checking. I
> suggest we document to the user what we have decided and then consider
> improving the object model so that we centralise this sort of checking
> in a later release.
>
> I'll do it now but any comments are welcome.
>
>
> Not sure what to do about the test though. Can we remove it from the
> list but kep the test as it is a valid test if we supplied that level
> of function ?
>
>
> regards,
> John.
Re: IHeaderBlockTest3
Posted by John Hawkins <HA...@uk.ibm.com>.
Having looked into this further I stick by my first statement. The testing
we did in te other verssion of the method is now in place however, it does
not fully test the very complex scenario which the test is attempting.
I would rather we concentrate on de/serialisation issues and issues
related to unsupported types etc. than rather complex user error issues.
For now the doc and slightly upgraded testing is enough
Roshan Weerasuriya <ro...@opensource.lk>
22/02/2005 14:46
Please respond to
"Apache AXIS C Developers List"
To
Apache AXIS C Developers List <ax...@ws.apache.org>
cc
Subject
Re: IHeaderBlockTest3
hi John,
>This test attempts to set the same attribute in a headerblock element
>twice.
If the user attempt to add same attribute the method "createAttribute()"
will return NULL for all duplicate additions. I see this check in the
code.
Roshan
On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 13:50 +0000, John Hawkins wrote:
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> this tests fails today. This test attempts to set the same attribute
> in a headerblock element twice. this is not allowed. Today we do no
> checking to see if it has already been set and thus we pass bad
> XMLfrom client to server.
>
> I'm not prepared to do the checking in the IHeaderBlock class to
> ensure that it checks before sending the msg over the wire. When e.g
> WAS sees the malformed message it returns back a good fault message
> saying what went wrong. i.e. the server in this case is checking. I
> suggest we document to the user what we have decided and then consider
> improving the object model so that we centralise this sort of checking
> in a later release.
>
> I'll do it now but any comments are welcome.
>
>
> Not sure what to do about the test though. Can we remove it from the
> list but kep the test as it is a valid test if we supplied that level
> of function ?
>
>
> regards,
> John.
Re: IHeaderBlockTest3
Posted by John Hawkins <HA...@uk.ibm.com>.
hmm - thanks for that.
I see it too now but only in the other version of the method :-)
I can copy the code !
Roshan Weerasuriya <ro...@opensource.lk>
22/02/2005 14:46
Please respond to
"Apache AXIS C Developers List"
To
Apache AXIS C Developers List <ax...@ws.apache.org>
cc
Subject
Re: IHeaderBlockTest3
hi John,
>This test attempts to set the same attribute in a headerblock element
>twice.
If the user attempt to add same attribute the method "createAttribute()"
will return NULL for all duplicate additions. I see this check in the
code.
Roshan
On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 13:50 +0000, John Hawkins wrote:
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> this tests fails today. This test attempts to set the same attribute
> in a headerblock element twice. this is not allowed. Today we do no
> checking to see if it has already been set and thus we pass bad
> XMLfrom client to server.
>
> I'm not prepared to do the checking in the IHeaderBlock class to
> ensure that it checks before sending the msg over the wire. When e.g
> WAS sees the malformed message it returns back a good fault message
> saying what went wrong. i.e. the server in this case is checking. I
> suggest we document to the user what we have decided and then consider
> improving the object model so that we centralise this sort of checking
> in a later release.
>
> I'll do it now but any comments are welcome.
>
>
> Not sure what to do about the test though. Can we remove it from the
> list but kep the test as it is a valid test if we supplied that level
> of function ?
>
>
> regards,
> John.
Re: IHeaderBlockTest3
Posted by Roshan Weerasuriya <ro...@opensource.lk>.
hi John,
>This test attempts to set the same attribute in a headerblock element
>twice.
If the user attempt to add same attribute the method "createAttribute()"
will return NULL for all duplicate additions. I see this check in the
code.
Roshan
On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 13:50 +0000, John Hawkins wrote:
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> this tests fails today. This test attempts to set the same attribute
> in a headerblock element twice. this is not allowed. Today we do no
> checking to see if it has already been set and thus we pass bad
> XMLfrom client to server.
>
> I'm not prepared to do the checking in the IHeaderBlock class to
> ensure that it checks before sending the msg over the wire. When e.g
> WAS sees the malformed message it returns back a good fault message
> saying what went wrong. i.e. the server in this case is checking. I
> suggest we document to the user what we have decided and then consider
> improving the object model so that we centralise this sort of checking
> in a later release.
>
> I'll do it now but any comments are welcome.
>
>
> Not sure what to do about the test though. Can we remove it from the
> list but kep the test as it is a valid test if we supplied that level
> of function ?
>
>
> regards,
> John.