Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-ant-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 20235 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2004 02:20:19 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Dec 2004 02:20:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 55737 invoked by uid 500); 6 Dec 2004 02:20:12 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-ant-user-archive@ant.apache.org Received: (qmail 55678 invoked by uid 500); 6 Dec 2004 02:20:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@ant.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Ant Users List" Reply-To: "Ant Users List" Delivered-To: mailing list user@ant.apache.org Received: (qmail 55661 invoked by uid 99); 6 Dec 2004 02:20:11 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (hermes.apache.org: 204.127.198.39 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of hoju@visi.com) Received: from rwcrmhc13.comcast.net (HELO rwcrmhc13.comcast.net) (204.127.198.39) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Sun, 05 Dec 2004 18:20:09 -0800 Received: from nicki.visi.com (c-66-41-141-26.mn.client2.attbi.com[66.41.141.26]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc13) with SMTP id <2004120602200701500nc6eje>; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 02:20:07 +0000 Message-Id: <5.2.1.1.0.20041205200129.03955008@pop.shell.visi.com> X-Sender: hoju@pop.shell.visi.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1 Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 20:20:01 -0600 To: "Ant Users List" From: Jacob Kjome Subject: Re: Properties getting unset with ? In-Reply-To: <16d6c62004120511326d06b13e@mail.gmail.com> References: <5.2.1.1.0.20041204220848.03921c28@pop.shell.visi.com> <5.2.1.1.0.20041204210037.038ed2e8@pop.shell.visi.com> <20041204195410.T15612@minotaur.apache.org> <5.2.1.1.0.20041204220848.03921c28@pop.shell.visi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N At 11:32 AM 12/5/2004 -0800, you wrote: >On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 23:50:02 -0600, Jacob Kjome wrote: >> >> I disagree with your statement that is almost no better than >> entity includes if you can't get the exact functionality you are looking >> for here. However, I do see the general utility in what you are >> describing. Luckily, there is a way to get what you want using >... >> >> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=107585688000004&r=1&w=2 >> >> This one shows a quick and simple example of what you want... >> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=ant-user&m=107589782422983&w=2 >> >> However, you should read the whole thread. Lots of good stuff there. > >Thanks, I did read the whole thread. What I really want is Dominique's >, but it seems that that isn't going to happen. That's a shame, >since it just seems like such a clean solution to this issue. > Yeah, it probably would have been. Maybe it was too risky at the time? Something for Ant-1.7? >The second link, above, looked viable until I read the comment from >Dominique on dependent targets. That scared me off, and Jan's solution >to that scared me off even more. If I added something like that to our >build system, I can pretty much guarantee that nobody else in the team >would have a clue what's going on. > I added it to mine, actually, except I added if/unless and "followDependencies" parameters. There are a very few times when I want to avoid following dependencies, so it is a nice option to have. Otherwise, dependent targets are followed by default. I never intentionally fail if the target I'm calling has dependencies. I suppose I could make it an option, but certainly not a default one. >So, I guess I'm stuck with doing things the clunky way. Sigh. > It works well for me and I don't think it the least bit confusing. Suit yourself. >Thanks, anyway, for your help. > No problem, Jake >-- >Martin Cooper > > >> Jake >> >> >> >> At 08:05 PM 12/4/2004 -0800, you wrote: >> > >> > >> >On Sat, 4 Dec 2004, Jacob Kjome wrote: >> > >> >> >> >> You should have expected this because you are using . It >> creates a >> >> new Ant project which is discarded after the call returns. I think >> what you >> >> meant to do is... >> > >> >No, actually I specifically didn't want to do that. I wanted to do what >> >the documentation for says I should be able to do: "This enables >> >the new implementation to call the old target, thus enhancing it with >> >tasks called before or after it". If won't work, then how do I >> >achieve the "tasks called before" part of this? >> > >> >What I wanted to do was: >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >If I can't do that, this seems to me to considerably lessen the value of >> > over just a plain entity include. >> > >> >The only way I can think of now is to define more targets: >> > >> > >> > ... >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >This will result in a bunch of otherwise unnecessary targets cluttering >> >up my build file, just to get stuff done before the target I'm trying to >> >override. >> > >> >Is there a better way? >> > >> >TIA. >> > >> >-- >> >Martin Cooper >> > >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> That should work as expected. >> >> >> >> Jake >> >> >> >> At 11:39 AM 12/4/2004 -0800, you wrote: >> >>> This is weird. I'm using Ant 1.6.2, and trying to use with >> >>> selective overriding of targets. The problem is that when I invoke an >> >>> imported target from its override, any properties set in that target >> >>> appear to be "forgotten" later on. An example will make this clear, I >> >>> hope. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Now if I do: >> >>> >> >>> ant -f importer.xml show >> >>> >> >>> I get: >> >>> >> >>> init: >> >>> >> >>> imported.init: >> >>> [echo] foo is set >> >>> >> >>> show: >> >>> [echo] foo = ${foo} >> >>> >> >>> The property has been forgotten? This is clearly not what I would expect! >> >>> >> >>> Now, if I remove the overridden 'init' target, I get: >> >>> >> >>> init: >> >>> [echo] foo is set >> >>> >> >>> show: >> >>> [echo] foo = foo-value >> >>> >> >>> which is what I expect. >> >>> >> >>> Is this a known bug? Or is there something I'm doing wrong? If it's a >bug, >> >>> is there a workaround? I can't really do much with when my >> >>> properties get forgotten. ;-} >> >>> >> >>> TIA. >> >>> >> >>> -- >> >>> Martin Cooper >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org >> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@ant.apache.org >> >>> >> >>> >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@ant.apache.org >> >> >> >> >> > >> >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org >> >For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@ant.apache.org >> > >> > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@ant.apache.org >> >> > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org >For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@ant.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@ant.apache.org