Message101767
r.david.murray: ah, sure :) However, I'm not sure a test case is absolutely required for this issue for two reasons:
- the fix is trivial: it's a one-liner that enables a SSL mode that explicitely authorizes SSL_write to be called a second time with a a different memory pointer than the first time. Since memory pointers are opaque to Python programmers anyway, I doubt it could break code (unless you'd expect the failure, of course :) )
- tests about SSL in non-blocking mode are almost inexistant, I think. The only one I could find tests the handshake. See issue #3890 for instance. Probably because writing tests in non-blocking mode isn't easy.
However, my test may be correct, I'm just not sure it will pass everywhere :) |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2010-03-26 18:41:47 | cbay | set | recipients:
+ cbay, janssen, pitrou, vstinner, giampaolo.rodola, r.david.murray |
2010-03-26 18:41:47 | cbay | set | messageid: <1269628907.42.0.299807879301.issue8240@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2010-03-26 18:41:45 | cbay | link | issue8240 messages |
2010-03-26 18:41:45 | cbay | create | |
|