On Mon, 8 Sep 2008, Gilles Scokart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I fear that with this aproach, you may have to "rollback" some of > the files already scanned because you will detect a loop after you > have already looped one or more time (including multiple time the > same files).
We'd detect the loop as soon as the maximum for recursion is reached, I don't think any rollback will be needed. > This "rollback" will be required if you want to provide a "clean" > fileset when the patterns (and file system) would give infinite > loop. I don't intend to do that at all. You'll get MAX recursions and no more - but no less either if you give us an infinite pattern. > The other aproach might be to fail the build if an infinite loop is > detected. What is wrong with the failing aproach? The original report was about <javac> recursing endlessly while scanning something in JAVA_HOME (a fileset to grab all jars from the extension dir would be my guess) without any user intervention - and JAVA_HOME points to a symbolic link that points to a parent on this particular Mac installation (I no longer have a working Mac to check myself). Note this is a fileset created by Ant internally and not defined by the user. Failing the build, while it is what we currently do, will not help people in a situation like this, in particular not if they aren't allowed to change the filesystem layout of the Java installation. Stefan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
