ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Bodewig <bode...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Potential breaking change to symlink task [ was Re: Jenkins build became unstable: Ant-Build-Matrix-master-Linux » JDK 1.8 (latest) #977]
Date Sun, 10 Dec 2017 11:45:57 GMT
[@Steve I'm trying to drag you in as you've been the one who brought in
the change that gets contested by
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58683 and maybe you
recall the details better than we do.]

On 2017-12-10, Jaikiran Pai wrote:

> On 10/12/17 3:09 PM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>> On 2017-12-10, Jaikiran Pai wrote:

>>> I'll investigate why this is failing (local tests pass for me) and fix it.

>> Target testCreateOverFile in the antunit test explicitly tries to
>> replace a file with a link, doing exactly what the bugzilla report says
>> is a bug. So the behavior seems to have been intentional.

>> We now need to figure out whether the bug report was genuine (and list
>> the change as breaking) or we want to revert part of your fix, change
>> the documentation and change the bugzilla issue's resolution to a
>> WONTFIX.

> The symlink task documentation[1] states this for the "overwrite" attribute:

> <quote>
> Overwrite existing links or not.
> </quote>

> It does explicitly mention that it's meant for overwriting links. The
> test here, like you note, tries to overwrite a non-symlink file and
> IMO it should error out, like it does with this change. After all, the
> entire symlink task is meant to just deal with symlinks and
> overwriting non-symlinks doesn't seem right. Having said that, I do
> agree that this is a change in behaviour and we should list this as
> such, if we do decide to let this change stay.

> The reason why that existing test was introduced in first place and
> the feature to let the symlink task overwrite a non-symlink file goes
> back to this issue
> https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43426. The rationale in
> that description seems to be that the Unix ln -sf apparently allows
> overwriting non-symlink file with a symlink. Given that context, I'm
> not really sure how we should proceed. Should we make this breaking
> change or should we let the prior behaviour continue?

> I'm in favour of this breaking change, but I won't mind switching back
> to the prior behaviour if you and others think that's a better thing
> to do.

Thank you for digging into the history, Jaikiran.

43426 is explicitly listed as a fixed bug (in 1.8.0) so I'm leaning
towards keeping and documenting the behavior of allowing <symlink> to
replace regular files.

Stefan

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


Mime
View raw message