Knut Anders Hatlen <[email protected]> writes: > Apache Jenkins Server <[email protected]> writes: > >> See <https://builds.apache.org/job/Derby-trunk/1431/changes> >> >> Changes: >> >> [kahatlen] DERBY-5840: Silence deprecation warnings in the network client >> >> [kahatlen] DERBY-5840: Compile network client with source and target level >> 1.5 > > [...] > >> compile: >> [javac] Compiling 142 source files to >> <https://builds.apache.org/job/Derby-trunk/ws/trunk/classes> >> [javac] >> <https://builds.apache.org/job/Derby-trunk/ws/trunk/java/client/org/apache/derby/client/am/LogicalCallableStatement.java>:52: >> error: LogicalCallableStatement is not abstract and does not >> override abstract method getObject(String,Map) in CallableStatement >> [javac] public class LogicalCallableStatement >> [javac] ^ >> [javac] >> <https://builds.apache.org/job/Derby-trunk/ws/trunk/java/client/org/apache/derby/client/am/LogicalCallableStatement.java>:271: >> error: name clash: getObject(int,Map<String,Class<?>>) in >> LogicalCallableStatement and getObject(int,Map) in CallableStatement >> have the same erasure, yet neither overrides the other >> [javac] public Object getObject(int i, Map<String, Class<?>> map) >> throws SQLException { >> [javac] ^ >> [javac] >> <https://builds.apache.org/job/Derby-trunk/ws/trunk/java/client/org/apache/derby/client/am/LogicalCallableStatement.java>:359: >> error: name clash: getObject(String,Map<String,Class<?>>) in >> LogicalCallableStatement and getObject(String,Map) in >> CallableStatement have the same erasure, yet neither overrides the >> other >> [javac] public Object getObject(String parameterName, Map<String, >> Class<?>> map) throws SQLException { >> [javac] ^ >> [javac] 3 errors >> >> BUILD FAILED >> <https://builds.apache.org/job/Derby-trunk/ws/trunk/build.xml>:630: The >> following error occurred while executing this line: >> <https://builds.apache.org/job/Derby-trunk/ws/trunk/java/client/build.xml>:65: >> Compile failed; see the compiler error output for details. > > I'm looking into this. > > FWIW, the tinderbox did not fail.
Should be fixed in revision 1362464. For details, see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-5840. Sorry about the noise. -- Knut Anders
