Am 02/19/17 um 19:47 schrieb Christian Schulte: > Am 02/19/17 um 13:06 schrieb Michael Osipov: >> Socket give you, of course, a lot of control, but they also impose an >> overhead compares to named pipes (mkfifo, CreateNamePipe). >> >> I think our biggest problem is that stdout is subject to buffering >> issues and in case if System#exit() status Z is the buffer, never >> written out. >> Surefire thinks that the crashed. > > Not sure I understand the issue at hand completely. If the code calling > "exit" is in Surefire and the code consuming the stdout/stderr streams > also is in Surefire, there is a solution to this. Can we just close the > stdio streams before calling exit? Would that be possible? Just add > System.out.close(), System.err.close() and System.in.close() before the > call to System.exit(). This could solve it. Will look up posix > documentation on this now. We maybe are just running into an issue where > the BSDs get it right and others are not strictly posix compliant. > Getting someone to test this on OSX would be interesting (kernel or > userland issue). This could even be a bug in the VM (not platform > independent). > > Regards, >
Quoting from here: <http://man.openbsd.org/OpenBSD-current/man3/stdio.3> "A file is disassociated from a stream by “closing” it. Output streams are flushed (any unwritten buffer contents are transferred to the host environment) before the stream is disassociated from the file." BUGs section has a hint about buffering as well. Regards, -- Christian --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
