http://lsd.student.utwente.nl/gump/ant/test-ant/gump_work/build_ant_test-ant
.html
last third of the page:
Testcase: testJunit(org.apache.tools.ant.types.AssertionsTest): Caused an
ERROR
Test AssertionTest failed
/data3/gump/ant/src/etc/testcases/types/assertions.xml:158: Test
AssertionTest
Hi,
The failure occurs in Gumpy because Gumpy sets the build.clonevm
system property for all builds (instead of those that ask for it).
There is not much we can do from the Ant side. We could try to detect
the property and adapt to it - or explicitly override it in the test
itself. I'm leaning
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
Hi,
The failure occurs in Gumpy because Gumpy sets the build.clonevm
system property for all builds (instead of those that ask for it).
There is not much we can do from the Ant side. We could try to detect
the property and adapt to it - or explicitly override it in the test
http://lsd.student.utwente.nl/gump/ant/gump_work/build_ant_test-ant.html
Testcase:
testGetCommandline(org.apache.tools.ant.types.CommandlineJavaTest):
FAILED
no classpath expected:4 but was:58
junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: no classpath expected:4 but was:58
at
http://lsd.student.utwente.nl/gump/ant/work/build_ant_test-ant.html
Testsuite: org.apache.tools.ant.ProjectTest
Tests run: 7, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0.301 sec
Testcase: testDuplicateTargets(org.apache.tools.ant.ProjectTest):
FAILED
Should throw BuildException because: Duplicate
On Fri, 20 Feb 2004, Jan Materne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We should get a consensus on how to handle multiple definitions of a
target inside a buildfile.
1. multiple targets defined in ONE buildfile is an error, while
definitions via import is correct
-- modify the test (more tests)
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On Fri, 20 Feb 2004, Jan Materne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We should get a consensus on how to handle multiple definitions of a
target inside a buildfile.
1. multiple targets defined in ONE buildfile is an error, while
definitions via import is correct
-- modify the test
Antoine Lévy-Lambert wrote:
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On Fri, 20 Feb 2004, Jan Materne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We should get a consensus on how to handle multiple definitions of a
target inside a buildfile.
1. multiple targets defined in ONE buildfile is an error, while
definitions via import is
Peter Reilly wrote:
Antoine Lévy-Lambert wrote:
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On Fri, 20 Feb 2004, Jan Materne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We should get a consensus on how to handle multiple definitions of a
target inside a buildfile.
1. multiple targets defined in ONE buildfile is an error, while
I am +1 for option 1, though I do note Gus Heck's point about
the merits
of an override option, though of course that gets
controversial in the
details:
C++ off by default; virtual enables, virtual functions not
valid in ctor
Java: on by default; final disables, virtual methods
+1 for (1).
-Original Message-
From: Peter Reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 20 February 2004 09:34
To: Ant Developers List
Subject: Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: ant/test-ant failed
Antoine Lévy-Lambert wrote:
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On Fri, 20 Feb 2004, Jan Materne
--- Jose Alberto Fernandez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
+1 for (1).
Another +1 for (1).
-Matt
On Fri, 20 Feb 2004, Jan Materne
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. multiple targets defined in ONE buildfile
is an error, while
definitions via import is correct
-- modify the test (more
Ok, 7 votes +1 (4 from PMC).
I´ve added another testcase (passing), because there are two things to test
1. fail, if there are two target definitions inside ONE file
2. pass, if there are two target definitions via IMPORTED file
see the cvs-message
Jan
-Original Message-
From: Matt
http://lsd.student.utwente.nl/gump/ant/work/build_ant_test-ant.html
[junit] Testsuite: org.apache.tools.ant.taskdefs.JarTest
[junit] Tests run: 23, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 40.177 sec
[junit] Testcase:
testRecreateWithUpdateNewerFile(org.apache.tools.ant.taskdefs.JarTest):
FAILED
Haven´t found any error.
http://lsd.student.utwente.nl/gump/ant/work/build_ant_test-ant.html
Start Time: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:58:45 (CET)
End Time: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 06:05:27 (CET)
BUILD SUCCESSFUL
Total time: 6 minutes 37 seconds
Maybe mail is from an older run ...
Jan
-Original
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Haven´t found any error.
http://lsd.student.utwente.nl/gump/ant/work/build_ant_test-ant.html
Start Time: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:58:45 (CET)
End Time: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 06:05:27 (CET)
BUILD SUCCESSFUL
Total time: 6 minutes 37 seconds
Maybe mail is from an older run ...
Jan
Fine, no open (reported) gump failure :-)
Jan
-Original Message-
From: Antoine Lévy-Lambert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 10:54 AM
To: Ant Developers List
Subject: Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: ant/test-ant failed
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Haven´t found
17 matches
Mail list logo