Mailing-List: contact derby-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: <derby-dev@db.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 10:21:29 -0700
From: David Van Couvering <David.Vancouvering@Sun.COM>
Subject: Re: How can I configure System property when executing test of JUnit
 ?
In-reply-to: <44646539.9050402@basil.ocn.ne.jp>
Sender: David.Vancouvering@Sun.COM
To: derby-dev@db.apache.org
Message-id: <4464C419.50409@sun.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
References: <44646539.9050402@basil.ocn.ne.jp>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060427)

Yes, the reason is that junit does not have permissions to set
properties, and it's in the

To do this, wrap your attempt to set the system property in a
PrivilegedAction block, like this:

        AccessController.doPrivileged(
            new java.security.PrivilegedAction()
            {
                public Object run()
                {
                    System.setProperty("my.property", "foo");
                }
            }
            );

If you have the itch, it would be nice to put a method like
"setSystemProperty" and "getSystemProperty" in
functionTests.util.BaseTestCase.java that does this for you, so we don't
have to do this everywhere in our code.

David


TomohitoNakayama wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> I'm switchovering SuicideOfStreaming test to JUnit in the issue of
> DERBY-1303, and encountered problem.
> 
> How can I configure System property when executing tests in JUnit ?
> 
> It seems that
> calling System.setProperty in test in JUnit fails to SecurityException
> though it was not failed when executed *not* as JUnit test ....
> 
> The test class of SuicideOfStreaming exists in derbyTesting.jar and
> settinng System property in this class would be succeeded under
> derby_tests.policy....
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/db/derby/code/trunk/java/testing/org/apache/derbyTesting/functionTests/util/derby_tests.policy
> 
> Any help would be greatly appricated ....
> 
> Best regards.
>