You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to batik-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org by Sam Ruby <ru...@us.ibm.com> on 2001/07/14 17:35:51 UTC
[GUMP] Build Failure - batik
See http://jakarta.apache.org/builds/gump/2001-07-14/xml-batik.html for
details.
Question for ant-dev:
Should <exclude name="**/jpython*" unless="jpython.present"/> match
org/apache/batik/script/jpython/JPythonInterpreter.java? It used
to...did this behavior recently change? I haven't identified any recent
change to Ant or Batik that would explain this failure.
Question for batik-dev:
Are you interested in being notified of failures? Batik normally
builds, so such notifications would be rare. In any case, it would be
entirely up to you to determine what actions, if any, you would like to
take based on failures.
In any case, if the exclude is changed to <exclude name="**/jpython/*"
unless="jpython.present"/> (and a similar change is made for jacl and
rhino), then these files are excluded as expected with the current (from
CVS) version of Ant.
- Sam Ruby
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: batik-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: batik-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [GUMP] Build Failure - batik
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On Sat, 14 Jul 2001, Sam Ruby <ru...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> See http://jakarta.apache.org/builds/gump/2001-07-14/xml-batik.html
> for details.
>
> Question for ant-dev:
>
> Should <exclude name="**/jpython*" unless="jpython.present"/>
> match org/apache/batik/script/jpython/JPythonInterpreter.java?
This is due to a change I've put into DirectoryScanner last Friday -
The pattern matches the directory jpython and so Ant assumed this
directory could not hold any included files and skipped the directory
for Ant 1.2 and 1.3.
There has been a bug report that convinced me that this assumption was
wrong - files under jpython should only be excluded if there is a
pattern that matches them IMHO, so I think the current behavior is
correct (and is the same Ant 1.1 showed BTW).
The problem now is that the pattern matching algorithm doesn't think
the * in jpython* could match a / (we use ** for matches that can
contain an arbitrary number of slashes and * for no slashes at all).
To me this looks consistent and I'd add in a slash to the pattern
which should not only fix this problem but also make the intent
clearer.
I am willing to modify the pattern matching part if others feel my
interpretation is wrong 8-)
Stefan
Re: [GUMP] Build Failure - batik
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On Sun, 15 Jul 2001, Nico Seessle <ni...@apache.org> wrote:
> It does now return Filesystem-dependent names (i.e. ant\taskdefs
> instead of ant/taskdefs which is tested for).
It always did - the testcase is new and I've only tested it on Unix
(that's why I didn't get the failure). I'll fix it today.
Stefan
Re: [GUMP] Build Failure - batik
Posted by Nico Seessle <ni...@apache.org>.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Conor MacNeill" <co...@cortexebusiness.com.au>
To: <an...@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 4:21 AM
Subject: Re: [GUMP] Build Failure - batik
> Sam,
>
> I think directory scanning may be broken. Currently one of Ant's test's
> fails for me:
> [junit] Testcase:
>
testChildrenOfExcludedDirectory(org.apache.tools.ant.DirectoryScannerTest):
> : FAILED
> [junit] (2) taskdefs package included
> [junit] junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: (2) taskdefs package
> included
>
> Interestingly it does not fail for the GUMP run - hmmm.
>
It does now return Filesystem-dependent names (i.e. ant\taskdefs instead of
ant/taskdefs which is tested for).
That would explain why it fails for you (on Windows) and not in Gump
(probably Unix).
Nico
Re: [GUMP] Build Failure - batik
Posted by Conor MacNeill <co...@cortexebusiness.com.au>.
Sam,
I think directory scanning may be broken. Currently one of Ant's test's
fails for me:
[junit] Testcase:
testChildrenOfExcludedDirectory(org.apache.tools.ant.DirectoryScannerTest):
: FAILED
[junit] (2) taskdefs package included
[junit] junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: (2) taskdefs package
included
Interestingly it does not fail for the GUMP run - hmmm.
I'll look into both these issues as I have time.
Conor
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam Ruby" <ru...@us.ibm.com>
To: <an...@jakarta.apache.org>
Cc: <ba...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 1:35 AM
Subject: [GUMP] Build Failure - batik
> See http://jakarta.apache.org/builds/gump/2001-07-14/xml-batik.html for
> details.
>
> Question for ant-dev:
>
> Should <exclude name="**/jpython*" unless="jpython.present"/> match
> org/apache/batik/script/jpython/JPythonInterpreter.java? It used
> to...did this behavior recently change? I haven't identified any
recent
> change to Ant or Batik that would explain this failure.
>
> Question for batik-dev:
>
> Are you interested in being notified of failures? Batik normally
> builds, so such notifications would be rare. In any case, it would be
> entirely up to you to determine what actions, if any, you would like
to
> take based on failures.
>
> In any case, if the exclude is changed to <exclude name="**/jpython/*"
> unless="jpython.present"/> (and a similar change is made for jacl and
> rhino), then these files are excluded as expected with the current
(from
> CVS) version of Ant.
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
>
Re: [GUMP] Build Failure - batik
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On Sat, 14 Jul 2001, Sam Ruby <ru...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> See http://jakarta.apache.org/builds/gump/2001-07-14/xml-batik.html
> for details.
>
> Question for ant-dev:
>
> Should <exclude name="**/jpython*" unless="jpython.present"/>
> match org/apache/batik/script/jpython/JPythonInterpreter.java?
This is due to a change I've put into DirectoryScanner last Friday -
The pattern matches the directory jpython and so Ant assumed this
directory could not hold any included files and skipped the directory
for Ant 1.2 and 1.3.
There has been a bug report that convinced me that this assumption was
wrong - files under jpython should only be excluded if there is a
pattern that matches them IMHO, so I think the current behavior is
correct (and is the same Ant 1.1 showed BTW).
The problem now is that the pattern matching algorithm doesn't think
the * in jpython* could match a / (we use ** for matches that can
contain an arbitrary number of slashes and * for no slashes at all).
To me this looks consistent and I'd add in a slash to the pattern
which should not only fix this problem but also make the intent
clearer.
I am willing to modify the pattern matching part if others feel my
interpretation is wrong 8-)
Stefan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: batik-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: batik-dev-help@xml.apache.org