[GitHub] [ant] jglick commented on pull request #200: Do not treat failure of `System.setSecurityManager` as fatal
jglick commented on PR #200: URL: https://github.com/apache/ant/pull/200#issuecomment-1675085764 Looks like this is indeed superseded by 689b6ea90ee1fbad580a437137d80609c9336f12 in particular. Thanks! -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
[GitHub] [ant] jglick commented on pull request #200: Do not treat failure of `System.setSecurityManager` as fatal
jglick commented on PR #200: URL: https://github.com/apache/ant/pull/200#issuecomment-1634629922 > it would anyway require an Ant release Yes, and then for `spotbugs-maven-plugin` to update to that release and cut its own release. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
[GitHub] [ant] jglick commented on pull request #200: Do not treat failure of `System.setSecurityManager` as fatal
jglick commented on PR #200: URL: https://github.com/apache/ant/pull/200#issuecomment-1632843378 > are you running these tests by building Ant from source? @jaikiran why would you ask that? https://github.com/apache/ant/pull/200#issuecomment-1631658175 reports an error that looks identical to that long reported in https://github.com/spotbugs/spotbugs-maven-plugin/issues/423 [using an Ant release](https://github.com/spotbugs/spotbugs-maven-plugin/blob/e8d61beed8f78772d3ed764f1542f98fffec1bc9/pom.xml#L177). Perhaps I am missing something. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
[GitHub] [ant] jglick commented on pull request #200: Do not treat failure of `System.setSecurityManager` as fatal
jglick commented on PR #200: URL: https://github.com/apache/ant/pull/200#issuecomment-1503392846 > the work we had done in a recent release to set `java.security.manager=allow` when launching Ant 82c70f3 I guess. Yes I think it would be appropriate to not even attempt to call `setSecurityManager` in recent Java releases; the original use case of running a program in-JVM which calls `System.exit` is rather dubious. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
