geode-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Helena Bales <hba...@pivotal.io>
Subject Re: PowerMock and mock ClassLoader
Date Wed, 05 Dec 2018 22:47:28 GMT
+1 to Galen. I was thinking about the GeodeAwaitility vs. Awaitility rule,
but that one only needed the rule because we do still depend on Awaitility.

On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 1:49 PM Alexander Murmann <amurmann@pivotal.io>
wrote:

> +1 to Galen's point. We already follow a PR process and if a committer
> bypasses that to sneak PowerMock back in, it seems like we have much larger
> problems.
>
> On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 10:35 AM Galen O'Sullivan <gosullivan@pivotal.io>
> wrote:
>
> > Can we just remove PowerMock from our dependencies and skip the rule? I'd
> > like to hope we can control our dependencies reasonably well.
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 4:45 PM Ryan McMahon <mcmellawatt@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1 to a spotless rule.  Unless anyone objects, I’ll look into doing
> that
> > > after PowerMock is eliminated.
> > >
> > > Ryan
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 3:50 PM Helena Bales <hbales@pivotal.io> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Once we have refactored tests currently using PowerMock, it might be
> > > > prudent to introduce a spotless rule to prohibit the reintroduction
> of
> > > > PowerMock.
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 3:32 PM Ryan McMahon <mcmellawatt@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I am interested in contributing to this effort.  I removed
> PowerMock
> > > > usage
> > > > > from one set of tests (GEODE-6052), and at that time I took a quick
> > > > glance
> > > > > at other usages.  I’ll assign GEODE-6143 to myself and see about
> > > removing
> > > > > the remaining usages.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ryan
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 3:08 PM Kirk Lund <klund@apache.org>
wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I filed GEODE-6143: PowerMock should not be used in Geode tests.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We need everyone to stop using PowerMock in new tests. If anyone
> > > sees a
> > > > > PR
> > > > > > attempting to use PowerMock please let the contributor know
about
> > > > > > GEODE-6143. The alternative is to refactor product code such
that
> > > > > > dependencies are passed into the constructor instead of reaching
> > out
> > > to
> > > > > > singletons and to avoid using static methods or static final
> fields
> > > for
> > > > > > anything would would make testing more difficult.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 11:20 AM Dan Smith <dsmith@pivotal.io>
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > +1 to removing PowerMock. Any situation that needs PowerMock
> > needs
> > > > > > > refactoring more.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -Dan
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 10:27 AM Kirk Lund <klund@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Anyone have any ideas which unit test is using PowerMock
and
> is
> > > > > > > injecting a
> > > > > > > > mock ClassLoader? This keeps failing in my precheckin
runs. I
> > > think
> > > > > we
> > > > > > > need
> > > > > > > > to a) remove all uses of PowerMock and b) forbid its
use
> going
> > > > > forward.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 2018-12-04 18:11:36,258 Distributed system shutdown
hook
> ERROR
> > > > Could
> > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > reconfigure JMX java.lang.LinkageError: loader constraint
> > > > violation:
> > > > > > > loader
> > > > > > > > (instance of org/powermock/core/classloader/MockClassLoader)
> > > > > previously
> > > > > > > > initiated loading for a different type with name
> > > > > > > > "javax/management/MBeanServer"
> > > > > > > > at java.lang.ClassLoader.defineClass1(Native Method)
> > > > > > > > at java.lang.ClassLoader.defineClass(ClassLoader.java:763)
> > > > > > > > at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.powermock.core.classloader.MockClassLoader.loadUnmockedClass(MockClassLoader.java:262)
> > > > > > > > at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.powermock.core.classloader.MockClassLoader.loadModifiedClass(MockClassLoader.java:206)
> > > > > > > > at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.powermock.core.classloader.DeferSupportingClassLoader.loadClass1(DeferSupportingClassLoader.java:89)
> > > > > > > > at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.powermock.core.classloader.DeferSupportingClassLoader.loadClass(DeferSupportingClassLoader.java:79)
> > > > > > > > at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:357)
> > > > > > > > at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.jmx.Server.unregisterAllMatching(Server.java:337)
> > > > > > > > at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.jmx.Server.unregisterLoggerContext(Server.java:261)
> > > > > > > > at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.jmx.Server.reregisterMBeansAfterReconfigure(Server.java:165)
> > > > > > > > at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.jmx.Server.reregisterMBeansAfterReconfigure(Server.java:141)
> > > > > > > > at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.LoggerContext.setConfiguration(LoggerContext.java:558)
> > > > > > > > at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.LoggerContext.reconfigure(LoggerContext.java:619)
> > > > > > > > at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.LoggerContext.reconfigure(LoggerContext.java:636)
> > > > > > > > at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > org.apache.logging.log4j.core.LoggerContext.start(LoggerContext.java:231)
> > > > > > > > at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.impl.Log4jContextFactory.getContext(Log4jContextFactory.java:243)
> > > > > > > > at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.impl.Log4jContextFactory.getContext(Log4jContextFactory.java:45)
> > > > > > > > at
> > > > > org.apache.logging.log4j.LogManager.getContext(LogManager.java:174)
> > > > > > > > at
> > > > org.apache.logging.log4j.LogManager.getLogger(LogManager.java:661)
> > > > > > > > at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.apache.geode.internal.logging.LogService.getLogger(LogService.java:64)
> > > > > > > > at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.apache.geode.internal.tcp.ConnectionTable.<clinit>(ConnectionTable.java:61)
> > > > > > > > at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.apache.geode.distributed.DistributedSystem.setThreadsSocketPolicy(DistributedSystem.java:263)
> > > > > > > > at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.apache.geode.distributed.internal.InternalDistributedSystem.lambda$static$0(InternalDistributedSystem.java:2317)
> > > > > > > > at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:748)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message