You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ant.apache.org by bu...@apache.org on 2001/07/11 20:57:59 UTC
[Bug 2584] New: - target if attribute doesn't understand multiple properties
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2584
*** shadow/2584 Wed Jul 11 11:57:59 2001
--- shadow/2584.tmp.12290 Wed Jul 11 11:57:59 2001
***************
*** 0 ****
--- 1,46 ----
+ +============================================================================+
+ | target if attribute doesn't understand multiple properties |
+ +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+ | Bug #: 2584 Product: Ant |
+ | Status: NEW Version: 1.3 |
+ | Resolution: Platform: All |
+ | Severity: Enhancement OS/Version: Other |
+ | Priority: Other Component: Core |
+ +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+ | Assigned To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org |
+ | Reported By: vadim.tkachenko@silverline.com |
+ | CC list: Cc: |
+ +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+ | URL: http://http:// |
+ +============================================================================+
+ | DESCRIPTION |
+ It would be nice to have a dependency on multiple properties, something like
+
+ <target name="A" if="a,b">
+
+ Justification is simple: a module that has more than one dependency. Consider
+ this:
+
+ <target name="check_modules"/>
+
+ <available classname="javax.management.loading.DefaultLoaderRepository"
+ classpath="${JMXRI.jar}"
+ property="JMXRI.present"/>
+
+ <available classname="com.sun.jdmk.comm.Enumerated"
+ classpath="${JMXTOOLS.jar}"
+ property="JMXTOOLS.present"/>
+
+ </target>
+
+ <target name="JMX_support"
+ depends="check_modules"
+ if="JMXRI.present,JMXTOOLS.present">
+
+ </target>
+
+ The JMX_support is never executed, nor the error message is given, because
+ "JMXRI.present,JMXTOOLS.present" is taken literally as a property name.
+
+ The fix is simple, question is: has this issue been brought up before and
+ rejected or implemented in one of the branches? If not, I can submit the patch.