Hi,
Looks like there still may be a small issue.
Running our build on a Windows system now starts and runs, until it gets to an
"integration test".
The integration test runs 'maven within maven"; we use it to test new maven
plugins.
This test fails with the message:
Maven invocation failed. Error configuring command-line.
Reason: Maven executable not found at:
F:\jenkins\tools\maven\apache-maven-3.3.9\bin\mvn.bat
Any ideas on how to fix this?
-Marshall Schor
On 9/19/2017 9:27 AM, Marshall Schor wrote:
> Thanks, Gav!
>
> That seemed to do the trick...
>
> -Marshall
>
>
> On 9/14/2017 6:28 PM, Gav wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> All of the 'Latest' options for 'Ant,Maven'Java' etc are configured to work
>> for both Linux and Windows, have been for a while.
>>
>> Maven 3.3.9 used to be 'Latest' until 3.5.0 was released when that took
>> over the symlinking for Latest.
>>
>> So 3.3.9 used to work for both, then stopped.
>>
>> As there are still a few jobs using 3.3.9 , I have created a tool location
>> on the Windows nodes for 3.3.9 so your builds
>> should now 'just work' by choosing 'Maven 3.3.9'
>>
>> Give it a whirl and let me know.
>>
>> Gav...
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 6:02 AM, Marshall Schor <m...@schor.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> We have a build which needs maven 3.3.9.
>>>
>>> I see in the Jenkins pulldown menu for configuring builds, there are 2
>>> picks for
>>> maven 3.3.9:
>>>
>>> - one is labeled "Maven 3.3.9"
>>>
>>> - one is labeled "Maven 3.3.9 (Windows)"
>>>
>>>
>>> We are using the first ("Maven 3.3.9"). Our build is not set to restrict
>>> where
>>> it can be run.
>>>
>>> So, when it runs on a windows machine, it fails, saying it can't find
>>> Maven 3.3.9.
>>>
>>> ---------------------
>>>
>>> Do you require all builds which need this Maven, to have 2 configurations,
>>> one
>>> with the (Windows) pick, restricted to Windows machine, and the other
>>> without
>>> that, for Linux boxes?
>>>
>>> We would of course prefer not to have to duplicate our build configurations
>>> because of this - so if there's another better way, please let us know.
>>>
>>> Thanks. -Marshall
>>>
>>>
>
