db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Myrna van Lunteren <m.v.lunte...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: javadoc errors anyone?
Date Wed, 20 Jan 2010 22:49:15 GMT
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Knut Anders Hatlen <Knut.Hatlen@sun.com> wrote:
> Myrna van Lunteren <m.v.lunteren@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 6:46 AM, Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hillegas@sun.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Myrna,
>>> These look like more fallout from a large submission I committed on Friday
>>> (subversion revision 899733 for DERBY-4491). I have fixed the DRDAConnThread
>>> javadoc warning with revision 901219.
>>> I don't see the second diagnostic ("Failed with following errors") when I
>>> build the javadoc. What command are you using to build the docs?
>>> Thanks,
>>> -Rick
>>> Myrna van Lunteren wrote:
>> I apologize - I'm using a slightly hokey homegrown utility that checks
>> on expected output of the build by checking each line against a list
>> of lines to ignore as 'ok'.
>> So that's where that line came from, not ant javadoc at all.
>> This was (after doing ant -Ddeprecation=off -Dsane=false all, twice)
>> the result from
>> ant -Ddeprecation=off buildjars. The output contains this section:
>> derbynetjar:
>>      [echo] Beginning derbynet.jar insane build
>>      [echo]  creating net.list
>>      [java] SANITY >>> /org/apache/derby/impl/drda/DDMWriter.class
>>      [echo]  creating new net.properties file
>> That line with SANITY is not on my list of lines to be ignored, and
>> so, it is new.
>> It's the only occurrence of that line in my build output, and looking
>> at SanityManager.java I don't understand why this would come up in the
>> build output...
>> Any ideas?
> classlister.java prints this warning if insane jars contain the
> SanityManager class. One of the commits Rick mentioned above introduced
> a call to a SanityManager method in insane jars, which caused the
> SanityManager class to be included also in the insane jars, hence the
> warning. I think Rick backed out the changes that caused it. Or are you
> still seeing the warning?
> --
> Knut Anders
Well, yes.

I synced up to 901399 and am (still) seeing this.
Maybe you're referring to Rick's fixing a sealing violation with
revision 899819...
Maybe this is then another instance of the same?


View raw message