CL https://golang.org/cl/19720 mentions this issue.

The above CL fails on quite a few platforms, as 9pfs apparently isn't included in /etc/services (I don't have a linux box at hand to check on; my FreeBSD and OS X boxes both have it).

I hope to dig a bit more into it once the kids have been put to bed. And any ideas on how to handle this? Leave the test out entirely, or selectively include that particular test only on known-good platforms?

Example 2 (the 1234port one) can test without an entry in service:

x, err := net.LookupPort("tcp", "1234superfake")
if err == nil {
    t.Errorf("fake service was accepted as %d", x)
}

However, a few quick sample Linux boxes had 9pfs in their service file, so that should not be an issue.

EDIT: Ubuntu lacks it, Arch Linux got it. The fake service test should cover the issue, though.

@Joushou - I don't quite follow your idea for testing 1234port without service. AFAIK, the test-code already checks if the lookup is expected to fail or not.

What really puzzles me is that this change causes some of the other networking tests to fail on windows/386...

In the previous code, 1234port would always succeed, returning 1234. The correct behaviour is to return the port if it is in /etc/services, otherwise fail. If you use an intentionally fake service starting with a digit, you can verify that the fix works as intended without having any requirements to /etc/services. This might be necessary, as only some Linux distros as well as BSD and OSX have 9pfs in /etc/services.

Does that make sense?

Not sure about the other tests failing, haven't looked into them.

Agreed, it would be best with a positive test too. But I fail to see how the code you gave above adds a fake service to do the lookup against. If I revert the fix in net/lookup.go and re-run the tests, they do indeed fail to report an error when looking up 123badservice.

Digging through what's being called, I should be able to dump something into the services-map in https://golang.org/src/net/port_unix.go, but that will only fix it on unixes w/o. cgo. As far as I've skimmed the others, they fairly begin calling system libraries...

Ah, sorry, you already had a test for 123badservice. I'm just spouting nonsense, then.

As for a positive test, a quick read of my ubuntu box's /etc/services show that a positive test on all platforms won't be possible. It contains no services starting with a digit (although OS X got 43 of such entries). I suspect injection of entries on some platforms might make the test a bit too nasty. We could run the positive test on BSD and OS X, but it's still heavily dependent on user configuration, which is not very nice.

As for the test errors. the issue is that you're now accepting arbitrarily large ports, as you fall to lookupPort if the port wasn't ok ((!ok && port != big && port != -big)) or if it didn't consume everything (consumed != len(service)). That means that, if the port was invalid because the service was longer than a valid port, it'll call lookupPort instead of throwing and error with "invalid port".

I guess the correct flow is either:

• Look up service. If found, return
• Convert to port number. If successful, return
• Return error.

Or:

• Convert to port number. If successful and fully consumed, return
• Look up service. If found, return
• Return error.

Edit: Removed super broken code snippet I had written at far too late. Sorry about that.