On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 12:49 AM, Henri Yandell <flame...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 3:51 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 24 November 2010 11:02, Stefan Bodewig <bode...@apache.org> wrote: >>> On 2010-11-24, sebb wrote: >>> >>>> On 24 November 2010 09:46, Stefan Bodewig <bode...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>> On 2010-11-22, Jörg Schaible wrote: >>> >>>>>> Stefan Bodewig wrote: >>> >>>>>>> The commons-lang3 builds fail[2] and too me it looks as if this was >>>>>>> because AWT is not running in headless mode, >>> >>>>> confirmed by passing -DargLine=-Djava.awt.headless=true to mvn - the >>>>> builds now pass. >>> >>>>>>> I am suprised the problem doesn't show up in the other CI builds. >>> >>>>> Still surprised 8-) >>> >>>>> It doesn't show up inside Gump on Linux or FreeBSD running OpenJDK or >>>>> the FreeBSD port of Sun's VM either - maybe this codebase's AWT detects >>>>> there is no X-Server and switches to headless mode without any help. >>> >>>> Or are those nodes running a frame buffer (I think that is the correct >>>> name)? >>> >>> I don't recall installing Xvfb (the X server running in a virtual frame >>> buffer) but it could have been pulled in as a dependency - and I'm >>> pretty sure we don't start it even if it is installed. No, I don't >>> think the builds have any X server to connect to. >>> >>>> Since there are headless hosts, maybe code which is supposed to be >>>> able to run anywhere (e.g. LANG) needs to take this into account? >>> >>>> I.e. Perhaps MacGump has found a bug in Lang? >>> >>> The tests that failed are the ones for the event package. I don't see >>> any uses of AWT in the main code but the tests use AWT classes >>> (ActionEvent and ActionListener). It seems as if the static initializer >>> of either class already requires a working window system on a Mac - it >>> may not be required on OpenJDK's AWT. >>> >>> I don't think the lang3 code requires a window system - so no bug in the >>> main code - but its tests do. >> >> IMO the tests should then be fixed (I may have time to look later). >> >> If there is a suitable alternative to the AWT events then use that, >> otherwise allow for the test failure when running headless. >> >> Seems to me it's more useful for Gump to point out these problems than >> to try and hide them. > > +1. > > Perhaps: > > javax.naming.event.ObjectChangeListener > javax.naming.event.NamingEvent
I've fixed this in r1040879. Generally I opted for using java.beans listeners. Hen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
