Myrna van Lunteren wrote:
On 3/3/08, Daniel John Debrunner <> wrote:
Daniel John Debrunner wrote:

Around line 401 of there is code that sets the
other properties that are used by the harness,
I meant "used by the policy file"


Yes, thx, I was thinking the same thing. I got better results when I
added"" to my -Djvmflags. My -Djvmflags now show:

We'll see how that goes...
The idea with the property was that setting it (to "") would enable extra permissions in the policy files that were needed when measuring code coverage. If the property is not set, these permissions should be ignored by the security manager, to avoid them affecting the regular testing by accident. These permissions should only be needed if you are running with classes or jar files that have been instrumented with EMMA. If you are just running regular testing without EMMA-instrumented code, they should not be needed.

When running the junit tests the property is automatically set by the SercurityManagerSetup if it finds a specific EMMA-class on the classpath, so that the junit tests can be run with classes and jars that are instrumented with EMMA. Something similar (as Dan suggests) could be done with the old harness to make it easier to measure code coverage for those tests.

If the changes for DERBY-3445 affects the old harness tests, then it was unintentional and probably a bug.