ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Bodewig <>
Subject Re: Forking JUnit (was Re: Ant not passing System values to JUnit task)
Date Thu, 04 Dec 2003 08:29:28 GMT
On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Adam R. B. Jack <> wrote:

> if one starts a JVM one way with certain settings ought not that be
> 'the default VM' that they wish for their environment, and ought not
> 'forked' JVMs match it?

In theory I agree - just that it's pretty hard to do (in particular to
do right).  CLASSPATH, Ant 1.6's -lib switch that means we are running
a more complex classloader setup, system properties, bootclasspath
settings, ...

> Heck, even including which JVM implementation.

I think we already do that, i.e. the JVM implementation running Ant is
the default for a new VM, but you can choose a different onw with the
vm attribute.

> I guess it is debatable, but (from where I stand right now) I
> believe that the argument for this default behaviour, is
> strong.

"backwards compatibility".  We can only enable it optionally IMHO.

In Ant 1.6 using <syspropertyset> in <junit> or <java> will give you
the same set of system properties in the forked VM, so we have that.

> It isn't just a Gump thing, is it?

Gump wants to enable the copying of system properties without having
to change the build file, that's why I suggested a magic property on
top of <syspropertyset>.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message