ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Blackard, Robert" <robert.black...@tgslc.org>
Subject RE: Build and Confiuration Managment with Ant... a.k.a. running A nt _ from_ JSP/Servlet
Date Thu, 16 Aug 2001 13:46:29 GMT
To you directly (not through the news group)... Yea... I fat fingered that
one... but I also have the problem that I have some many friends, both male
and female, with variations of that name from all around the US and Europe,
that I always have to double check which spelling I should use...

BTW... your first message came form an apache.org account and this message
came from imediation.com... I finally got the bright idea to look you up in
the Authors section of the Ant Documentation.  

Are you on the development team?  If so, what are your feeleings toward my
last message?  I don't think this is an appropriate thread to continue in
the group discussion, but I am interested.  I've been looking for a place to
get involved with Jakarta et. al.  I'd gladly make and test the modification
I described RE: adding the run() method.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephane Bailliez [mailto:sbailliez@imediation.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 8:36 AM
> To: ant-user@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Build and Confiuration Managment with Ant... 
> a.k.a. running
> A nt _ from_ JSP/Servlet
> 
> 
> np.
> 
> And it's Stephane. (ie Stephan, Stefan, Stephen, Steven,...).
> No sex surgery planned :-)
> 
> -- 
>  St├ęphane Bailliez 
>  Software Engineer, Paris - France 
>  iMediation - http://www.imediation.com 
>  Disclaimer: All the opinions expressed above are mine and 
> not those from my
> company. 
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Blackard, Robert [mailto:robert.blackard@tgslc.org]
> > Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 3:31 PM
> > To: 'ant-user@jakarta.apache.org'
> > Subject: RE: Build and Confiuration Managment with Ant... 
> > a.k.a. running
> > A nt _ from_ JSP/Servlet
> > 
> > 
> > Stephanie... I apologize... I stated that the reference email 
> > was one I
> > finally found when, in fact, you were the one that gave it to 
> > me in the
> > first place.  Sorry... I've been searching the archives and 
> > the web for two
> > days to find information such as you provided and the general 
> > aggravation
> > lead me to type before thinking.  Again, I'm sorry.
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Blackard, Robert [mailto:robert.blackard@tgslc.org]
> > > Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 8:27 AM
> > > To: 'ant-user@jakarta.apache.org'
> > > Subject: RE: Build and Confiuration Managment with Ant... 
> > > a.k.a. running
> > > A nt _ from_ JSP/Servlet
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Stephane... thanks for the direct feedback, but I have some 
> > > comments on this
> > > I'd like to share with the group.
> > > 
> > > First, CruiseContol certainly looks like it's going to 
> > > provide most of what
> > > I need... I might simply write some extensions and use it 
> > rather than
> > > developing my own (I haven't looked at it in detail yet, but 
> > > I need the
> > > ability to select from a set of Projects, target deployment 
> > > on one of a set
> > > of Servers, deployment to use a specific instance of a 
> > > database, deployment
> > > using a specific instance of an LDAP server, and build using 
> > > a specific
> > > labeled version or the latest version [ie. 
> > > pre-production/test or nightly
> > > builds]).
> > > 
> > > Now, I'm gettig out my soap box, so feel free to ignore the 
> > > rest of this
> > > message.
> > > 
> > > I must disagree with your comment that System.exit() calls 
> > > are 'somewhat
> > > normal'... yes it might be commonly done, but I don't beleive 
> > > it should be
> > > and according to the Java specifications it is by no means normal.
> > > 
> > > The Fathers of Java intentionally and implicitly defined the 
> > > main() method
> > > to be void.  This wasn't something they just pulled out of 
> > > the air, nor was
> > > it something that they did because it's how every other 
> > > system did it -
> > > quite the contrary, this is a departure from the standard 
> > > practice and was a
> > > very concious decision on their part.
> > > 
> > > As I understand it, one of the fundamental reasons that the 
> > > main() method
> > > was defined as void was that not all operating systems 
> > > supported result
> > > codes.  What Ant, and any other system that uses a 
> > > System.exit() is doing,
> > > is intentionally violating the defined language.
> > > 
> > > Further, using a System.exit() anywhere assumes that the 
> > > currently executing
> > > code is the only code running in the current JVM.  This 
> > > should be very well
> > > documented in any Installation and Usage documentation, but 
> > > also violates
> > > the ability of a single JVM to be used to manage multiple 
> executing
> > > applications.
> > > 
> > > That said, the standard argument for using a System.exit() 
> > is that it
> > > support the use of scripting with tools like a Unix shell or Perl.
> > > Certainly, providing an exit code is a means to support this, 
> > > but again, not
> > > all operating systems support exit codes.
> > > 
> > > In this mail, and another posting that I finally uncovered
> > > http://www.mail-archive.com/ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org/msg0797
> > > 5.html, you
> > > describe using the Security Manager to trap such behavior.  
> > > IMHO I beleive
> > > that it sould be the person that expects exit codes, and is 
> > therefore
> > > seeking behavior different that that defined by the language, 
> > > that should be
> > > required to customize their environment by using a facility 
> > > to generate exit
> > > codes, for example, creating a Runner class that catches 
> > > exceptions and
> > > returns exit codes and executing 
> > > org.apache.tools.ant.Main.main() through
> > > the Runner class.
> > > 
> > > Further, since I will not be in control of the final 
> > > deployment of my code,
> > > and therefore have no control over the security policy that 
> > > the main system
> > > is running under, assuming that I can simply throw a new 
> > > security manager
> > > into the mix might (but granted is unlikely) to be a problem. 
> > >  While it
> > > won't be a problem for me, I imagine it may be a problem for 
> > > someone else.
> > > 
> > > Finally, since I don't expect the definition of
> > > org.apache.tools.ant.Main.main() to change since it's out 
> > > there in so many
> > > places, may I suggest alternatively that you implement the
> > > org.apache.tools.ant.Main.run() method that throws 
> > > exceptions, and modify
> > > org.apache.tools.ant.Main.main() to call 
> > > org.apache.tools.ant.Main.run() and
> > > generate System.exit(0) if no exception is thrown and 
> > > System.exit(1) if an
> > > exception is thrown.  That way, those of us that wish to 
> > use Ant from
> > > another Java process can do so without overriding the 
> > > Security Manager.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Stephane Bailliez [mailto:sbailliez@apache.org]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 12:40 PM
> > > > To: ant-user@jakarta.apache.org
> > > > Subject: Re: Build and Confiuration Managment with Ant... 
> > > > a.k.a. running
> > > > Ant _ from_ JSP/Servlet
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > You might get your hands on cruisecontrol that demonstrate 
> > > > how to do this.
> > > > About the System.exit(), that's somewhat normal, you have to 
> > > > change the
> > > > security manager when running Ant.
> > > > 
> > > > http://cruisecontrol.sourceforge.net
> > > > 
> > > > Stephane
> > > > 
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Duffey, Kevin" <KDuffey@BUYMEDIA.com>
> > > > To: <ant-user@jakarta.apache.org>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 7:32 PM
> > > > Subject: RE: Build and Confiuration Managment with Ant... 
> > > > a.k.a. running Ant
> > > > _ from_ JSP/Servlet
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > That is a kewl idea! My guess is that the XML is not 
> > > > validated right?
> > > > > Perhaps WebLogic or whatever is trying to validate it? I 
> > > > don't think ANT
> > > > > scripts use a DTD do they?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Blackard, Robert [mailto:robert.blackard@tgslc.org]
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 10:29 AM
> > > > > To: 'ant-user@jakarta.apache.org'
> > > > > Subject: Build and Confiuration Managment with Ant... 
> > > > a.k.a. running Ant
> > > > > _ from_ JSP/Servlet
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm trying to use Ant to provide an automated build an test 
> > > > service on a
> > > > > testing server.  I've already built Ant scripts (.XML 
> > files) that
> > > > > perform all the tasks related to the process (get for 
> > > > source control,
> > > > > compile, package, etc.).
> > > > >
> > > > > Now I'm trying to provide a web page on the testing 
> > server used to
> > > > > submit a request to have a build and test cycle started.  
> > > I'm using
> > > > > JDK1.3.1 on Windows NT 4.0 SP 6, Ant 1.3, WebLogic 6.0 SP2, 
> > > > and Xerces
> > > > > 1.3.0.
> > > > >
> > > > > Based on the documentation and my experience with Java, I 
> > > > expected to
> > > > > have my JSP/Servlet perform the following...
> > > > >
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> START <<<<<<<<<<<<<
> > > > >     ...
> > > > >     String project = request.getParameter( "project" );
> > > > >
> > > > >     try {
> > > > >       String args[] = { "-buildfile", 
> "D:/Development/run.xml",
> > > > > "-logfile", "D:/Development/" + project + ".log", "-D" 
> > + project +
> > > > > ".build", "Build" };
> > > > >
> > > > >       org.apache.tools.ant.Main.main( args );
> > > > >       ....
> > > > >     } catch( Exception e ) {
> > > > >         ...
> > > > >     }
> > > > >     ...
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> END <<<<<<<<<<<<<
> > > > >
> > > > > where the run.xml is
> > > > >
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> START <<<<<<<<<<<<<
> > > > > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
> > > > >
> > > > > <project name="run" default="Build" basedir="D:/development">
> > > > >
> > > > >   <!-- set global properties for this build -->
> > > > >   <!-- builder.vss - the VSS directory containing build 
> > > scripts -->
> > > > >   <property name="builder.vss.xml" value="/Builder/xml"/>
> > > > >   <!-- env - the environment prefix -->
> > > > >   <property environment="env"/>
> > > > >
> > > > >   <target name="prepare">
> > > > >     <!-- Create the time stamp -->
> > > > >     <tstamp>
> > > > >       <format property="TIMESTAMP" pattern="MM/dd/yyyy 
> > hh:mm a"/>
> > > > >     </tstamp>
> > > > >     <vssget localPath="${basedir}"
> > > > >             login="<user>,<pwd>"
> > > > >             vsspath="${builder.vss.xml}/builder.xml"
> > > > >             writable="false"/>
> > > > >   </target>
> > > > >
> > > > >   <target name="Proj1" if="Proj1.build" depends="prepare">
> > > > >     <ant antfile="${basedir}/builder.xml" target="Proj1"/>
> > > > >   </target>
> > > > >
> > > > >   <target name="Proj2" if="Proj2.build" depends="prepare">
> > > > >     <ant antfile="${basedir}/builder.xml" target="Proj2"/>
> > > > >   </target>
> > > > >
> > > > >   <target name="Build" depends="Proj1,Proj2"/>
> > > > > </project>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> END <<<<<<<<<<<<<
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm getting some odd results, however.
> > > > >
> > > > > When I run the above run.xml from a command prompt, 
> > > everything works
> > > > > fine.  When I trigger the JSP running in WebLogic, I get 
> > > > the following
> > > > > .LOG file
> > > > >
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> START <<<<<<<<<<<<<
> > > > > Buildfile: D:\Development\run.xml
> > > > >
> > > > > BUILD FAILED
> > > > >
> > > > > D:\Development\run.xml:8: Config file is not of 
> > expected XML type
> > > > >
> > > > > Total time: 0 seconds
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> END <<<<<<<<<<<<<
> > > > >
> > > > > and the WebLogic server is outright terminated without 
> > any logs or
> > > > > messsages... as if an exit(0) (yea... I had to resort to C 
> > > > to describe
> > > > > the behavior... sorry) were being called.
> > > > >
> > > > > I've tried changing the catch clause to detect 
> > > RuntimeException and
> > > > > Throwable as well as Exception, but whatever is 
> occurring isn't
> > > > > triggering a catch.
> > > > >
> > > > > Has anyone had any experience setting something like this 
> > > > up, or seen
> > > > > the behavior I'm describing?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 

Mime
View raw message