#403 Handling no codebase attribute in APPLET tag

closed
None
5
2008-03-31
2008-02-17
lacton
No

I have run into an issue with the way HttpUnit handles an APPLET tag without an explicit codebase attribute.

According to Sun, "by default, a browser looks for an applet's class and archive files in the same directory as the HTML file that has the <APPLET> tag."
(Source: http://java.sun.com/docs/books/tutorial/deployment/applet/html.html\)

It seems HttpUnit does not comply with this specification. It looks for the class in the root directory of the web server, regardless of the path of the HTML page containing the APPLET tag.

I have written a TestCase to show this behavior, and a simple fix that makes this test pass.

Regards.

Discussion

  • lacton

    lacton - 2008-02-17

    TestCase that fails against revision 820 of the trunk

     
  • lacton

    lacton - 2008-02-17

    Logged In: YES
    user_id=1588761
    Originator: YES

    File Added: applet_patch.r820

     
  • lacton

    lacton - 2008-02-17

    Patch made against revision 820

     
  • lacton

    lacton - 2008-03-09

    Logged In: YES
    user_id=1588761
    Originator: YES

    If there is anything unsatisfactory about the test case and/or the proposed patch, I will gladly fix it.

     
  • lacton

    lacton - 2008-03-15

    Logged In: YES
    user_id=1588761
    Originator: YES

    ?

     
  • Wolfgang Fahl

    Wolfgang Fahl - 2008-03-31

    Logged In: YES
    user_id=1220573
    Originator: NO

    Thank you very much. We very busy recently and therfore you had to wait a bit.
    subversion version 861 might make you a happy camper.

     
  • Wolfgang Fahl

    Wolfgang Fahl - 2008-03-31
    • assigned_to: nobody --> wolfgang_fahl
    • status: open --> closed
     
  • lacton

    lacton - 2008-04-03

    Logged In: YES
    user_id=1588761
    Originator: YES

    Great! Thank you for including this fix to the trunk.

     

Log in to post a comment.

Get latest updates about Open Source Projects, Conferences and News.

Sign up for the SourceForge newsletter:





No, thanks