> Le 12 avr. 2018 à 16:57, Stefan Bodewig <bode...@apache.org> a écrit :
> On 2018-04-12, Nicolas Lalevée wrote:
>> The Junit task is printing a warning if it finds multiple versions of
>> Ant in the classpath of the unit tests. It seems it doesn’t do
>> correctly the job if the ant runtime is explicitly removed from the
>> classpath.
> Quite possible.
>> Here the function which checks the classpath:
>> https://github.com/apache/ant/blob/master/src/main/org/apache/tools/ant/taskdefs/optional/junit/JUnitTask.java#L1362
>> <https://github.com/apache/ant/blob/master/src/main/org/apache/tools/ant/taskdefs/optional/junit/JUnitTask.java#L1362>
> this is in the forked case.
>> And here is the one which build the classloader during the actual forked run:
>> https://github.com/apache/ant/blob/master/src/main/org/apache/tools/ant/taskdefs/optional/junit/JUnitTask.java#L1952
>> <https://github.com/apache/ant/blob/master/src/main/org/apache/tools/ant/taskdefs/optional/junit/JUnitTask.java#L1952>
> AFAICT createClassloader is not invoked for forked VMs, only in the
> non-forked case.
>> Shouldn’t the classloader be built the same way in both function?
> In the forked case, the classloader is not built by the task, the
> CommandLineJava instance collects the classpath and sets it as
> -classpath command line argument.

Ha yes, you’re right.

As far as I can see, the classpath used by checkForkedPath is the proper one. 
The function which manipulates the classpath to add the Ant runtime [1] is 
called before. So I should start looking into the AntClassLoader which is 
improperly finding the Ant classes. Maybe we should « isolate » it.

Or maybe that check for duplicate ant jar is only useful when includeantruntime 
is _not_ set to « no ». Since includeantruntime is true by default, it is nice 
that Ant is printing a warning when it also find Ant classes in the provided 
classpath, it is a common pitfall. But when includeantruntime is explicitely 
set to false, then I would say that the user know what he's doing, thus no need 
for special check.



Reply via email to