Mailing-List: contact dev-help@ant.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Ant Developers List" <dev@ant.apache.org>
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
MailScanner-NULL-Check: 1308229469.30987@PP+kfSe2izTO04gBGUe5Rw
Message-ID: <4DF0C4DC.6020806@apache.org>
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2011 14:04:28 +0100
From: Steve Loughran <stevel@apache.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110419 Red Hat/3.1.10-1.el6_0 Thunderbird/3.1.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ant Developers List <dev@ant.apache.org>
Subject: Re: junit4 test runners
References: <4DF0A741.5030008@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <4DF0A741.5030008@apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 06/09/2011 11:58 AM, Steve Loughran wrote:
> I'm doing something non-ant related, but I'm wondering if anyone has
> seen this problem here, as it's the closest to what I'm trying to do
>
> 1. I have some code that is a test runner for Junit3.8.x classes, it works.
> 2. I am trying to flip the ivy version to junit 4.8.2 something.
> 3. I rerun my test runner tests
> 4. I get sealing violations on dependent JARs from my own upstream projects
>
> Neither my JARs or JUnit4 is sealed, yet as soon as say "JUnit 4",
> things stop working.
>
> Anyone else seen something like this? Or am I deep in a classloader hell
> of my own making?

-turns out one file in a package was sealed. What's interesting is that 
this triggered a problem only in junit4 builds, which makes me thing 
that the classloading was different. Perhaps a sealing violation only 
triggers if the first class is loaded from a sealed JAR, and rest from 
unsealed ones.

Odd though -reverting to junit3 did fix it, even though ivy set the 
build up both times.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org