Did 'cvs update', 'bootstrap', and 'build test' again this morning, on my work machine this time (Win2K, JDK 1.4.0_01 as well, by way faster and dual CPU), and get consistently the same failures on asserts in lines 232 & 245! When I comment out these two lines, the DateSelectorTest completes successfully (as does the entire Ant testsuite). Not sure what's wrong. --DD
-----Original Message----- From: Bruce Atherton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2002 4:19 PM To: Ant Developers List Subject: Re: Problem with latest Selector patch? At 10:29 AM 7/6/2002 -0500, Dominique Devienne wrote: >Fresh sandbox of Ant branch 1.5 from this morning. Just did bootstrap and >build test. Win2K, JDK 1.4.0_01. --DD > >Testcase: >testSelectionBehaviour(org.apache.tools.ant.types.selectors.DateSelectorTes t >): FAILED >expected:<TTFFTFFFTTTT> but was:<TFFFFFFFFFFT> Ok, I've just done a number of tests with fresh checkouts and I can't reproduce this error. With Win98, I have produced a different error in org.apache.tools.ant.util.FileUtilsTest that looks similar, though. Here are the details: Win2K: 1) JDK 1.1.8 (all shells) - All selector tests pass (when basedir in selector.xml is adjusted) 2) JDK 1.3.1 (all shells) - All pass 3) JDK 1.4.0_01 a) CMD - All pass b) 4NT - All pass c) Cygwin - org.apache.tools.ant.util.FileUtilsTest fails, line 405 Windows 98: 1) JDK 1.1.8 - All selector tests pass (when basedir in selector.xml is adjusted) 2) JDK 1.4.0_01 - org.apache.tools.ant.util.FileUtilsTest fails, line 122 Linux (Debian Woody): 1) JDK 1.3.1 - All pass 2) JDK 1.4.0_01 - All pass Just to be sure this isn't intermittent, I reran the test on Win2K with JDK 1.4.0_01 a dozen times. I ran within CMD, 4NT and Cygwin. I even tried removing and refetching the expected files a few times, in case it was a random error based on the timestamps of those, but it passed every time. The line that is failing in the Windows 98 run is "fu.setFileLastModified(removeThis, 123456);", which sets the last modified time on a file to a specific millisecond value. That is interesting because the line that is failing for Dominique is comparing for a specific millisecond time as well - "s.setMillis(1006347300000L);". The Win2K Cygwin failure doesn't appear related, as the error is "expected:<d:\bar> but was:<D:\bar>". So after all this testing, I have to say that I am at a loss as to what Dominique is experiencing. I can comment out that particular test, but then we won't be exercising the setMillis() method in DateSelector. What is the right answer? Should I nix it anyway? Also, Dominique, if you comment out line 232 of DateSelectorTest does everything else then work for you? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
