[Design of AOP on JBoss (Aspects/JBoss)] - Re: Help needed to create a patch.
by kabir.khan＠jboss.com
You can ignore the Precedence test failures, and we will try to look later. The background for this is that the ordering is influences by the OS the JVM is running on. Our automated test runs are on Linux and Flavia is on Linux. I used to be on Windows, but have been on OS X for a year. Since you're the first Windows user to run these in a long time that is probably that cropping up again.
Same for the XXXXOutOfVmTestCases. They used to work on Windows, but have not been run there for a long time. The issue is looking up the 'java' executable.
However, the annotationoverride test should not take that long, it should only take a few seconds (as should all the tests). If you have not already done so, try quitting and starting it all again. If that does not work, try taking a thread dump (I think it is CTRL-BREAK on Windows).
For your own purposes when getting up to speed, you can disable tests by commenting them out in base-tests.xml.
View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4249614#4249614
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4249614
17 years, 1 month
[Design of AOP on JBoss (Aspects/JBoss)] - Re: Help needed to create a patch.
by ZeroTolerance
Hi,
Running the tests of Branch_2_1 build_tests_jdk50.xml before changing the code gives me the following error:
_run-javaagent-test:
| [echo] Running precedence with instrumentor org.jboss.aop.instrument.GeneratedAdvisorInstrumentor
| [junit] Running org.jboss.test.aop.precedence.NoPrecedenceTestCase
| [junit] Tests run: 8, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0,922 sec
| [junit] Running org.jboss.test.aop.precedence.PrecedenceTester
| [junit] Tests run: 10, Failures: 6, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 1,094 sec
| [junit] Test org.jboss.test.aop.precedence.PrecedenceTester FAILED
and
_run-javaagent-test:
| [echo] Running precedence with instrumentor org.jboss.aop.instrument.ClassicInstrumentor
| [junit] Running org.jboss.test.aop.precedence.NoPrecedenceTestCase
| [junit] Tests run: 8, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0,719 sec
| [junit] Running org.jboss.test.aop.precedence.PrecedenceTester
| [junit] Tests run: 10, Failures: 6, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0,86 sec
| [junit] Test org.jboss.test.aop.precedence.PrecedenceTester FAILED
and
not-woven-tests:
| [annotationc] Working directory ignored when same JVM is used.
| [annotationc] [compiled] C:\Java\workspace\Branch_2_1\aop\target\test-classes\org\jboss\test\aop\annotationc\BytecodePOJO$InnerClass.class
| [annotationc] [compiled] C:\Java\workspace\Branch_2_1\aop\target\test-classes\org\jboss\test\aop\annotationc\BytecodePOJO$StaticInnerClass.class
| [annotationc] [compiled] C:\Java\workspace\Branch_2_1\aop\target\test-classes\org\jboss\test\aop\annotationc\BytecodePOJO.class
| [junit] Running org.jboss.test.aop.annotationc.AnnotationTester
| [junit] Tests run: 13, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0,375 sec
| [junit] Running org.jboss.test.aop.bridgemethodnotwoven.BridgeMethodTestCase
| [junit] Tests run: 3, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0,578 sec
| [junit] Running org.jboss.test.aop.ejb3dependencies.EJB3CompatibilityTestCase
| [junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0,266 sec
| [junit] Running org.jboss.test.aop.methodhashing.MethodHashingTestCase
| [junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0,094 sec
| [junit] Running org.jboss.test.aop.pointcut.PointcutTestCase
| [junit] Tests run: 7, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0,515 sec
| [junit] Running org.jboss.test.aop.proxy.ProxyTestCase
| [junit] Tests run: 12, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 1,376 sec
| [junit] Running org.jboss.test.aop.proxy.ReSerializeContainerProxyWithAspectsInVmTestCase
| [junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0,813 sec
| [junit] Running org.jboss.test.aop.proxy.ReSerializeContainerProxyWithAspectsOutOfVmTestCase
| [junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Time elapsed: 0,14 sec
| [junit] Test org.jboss.test.aop.proxy.ReSerializeContainerProxyWithAspectsOutOfVmTestCase FAILED
| [junit] Running org.jboss.test.aop.proxy.ReSerializeContainerProxyWithInterceptorsInVmTestCase
| [junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0,781 sec
| [junit] Running org.jboss.test.aop.proxy.ReSerializeContainerProxyWithInterceptorsOutOfVmTestCase
| [junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Time elapsed: 0,141 sec
| [junit] Test org.jboss.test.aop.proxy.ReSerializeContainerProxyWithInterceptorsOutOfVmTestCase FAILED
| [junit] Running org.jboss.test.aop.proxy.ReSerializeContainerProxyWithNonInitialisedAdvicesInVmTestCase
| [junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 1,031 sec
| [junit] Running org.jboss.test.aop.proxy.ReSerializeContainerProxyWithNonInitialisedAdvicesOutOfVmTestCase
| [junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Time elapsed: 0,157 sec
| [junit] Test org.jboss.test.aop.proxy.ReSerializeContainerProxyWithNonInitialisedAdvicesOutOfVmTestCase FAILED
| [junit] Running org.jboss.test.aop.proxy.ReSerializeContainerProxyWithScopedAspectsInVmTestCase
| [junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0,86 sec
| [junit] Running org.jboss.test.aop.proxy.ReSerializeContainerProxyWithScopedAspectsOutOfVmTestCase
| [junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Time elapsed: 0,156 sec
| [junit] Test org.jboss.test.aop.proxy.ReSerializeContainerProxyWithScopedAspectsOutOfVmTestCase FAILED
There are more like these!
It is now at:
_run-precompiled-test:
| [echo] Compiling annotationoverride with optimized=true and instrumentor org.jboss.aop.instrument.ClassicInstrumentor
For more than 1 hour and nothing seems to happen.
Any idea?
Regards,
Werner
View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4249602#4249602
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4249602
17 years, 1 month
[Design of POJO Server] - Re: AS-5 Files to watch for application redeployment
by alesj
"jaikiran" wrote : *by default* should we be really doing the guess work for redeployments or like AS-4.x only watch for known top level files
|
I already have this implemented, but I don't like the catch behind it. :-(
We already have a notion of known file names, it's "hidden" under FileMatcher interface.
Currently the only one's implementing it are exactly the parsing deployers that know certain configuration files == true candidates for re-deploy on change.
But here comes the catch. :-)
FileMatcher only works on VirtualFile, whereas in StructureCacheFilter we match against path.
Hence I added PathMatcher interface, which is again currently only implemented by parsing deployers.
And the catch is how to guarantee consistency between file and path matchers?
A VFFilter and SCFilter for MetaDataStructureModificationChecker must filter the same resources, meaning sets of file and path matchers must be in-synch/consistent.
Currently with only parsing deployers implementing those two interfaces, where I made the impls consistent,
I don't see an issue, but if the user deploys any bean implementing either of those two interfaces,
that bean will be automatically (via in-callback) part of filtering, hence potentially breaking consistency.
Perhaps the solution is to change SCFilter to work against VF instead of just path.
I'll check how much work it is to change this.
View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4249590#4249590
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4249590
17 years, 1 month