Yup, agreed, and based on that, here's my +1, binding. Thanks and kudos for the quick investigation! CheersBruno
From: Stefan Bodewig <bode...@apache.org> To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org> Sent: Friday, 12 May 2017 9:44 PM Subject: Re: [compress] ZIP Integration Tests (was Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.14 Based on RC1) On 2017-05-12, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On 2017-05-12, Stefan Bodewig wrote: >> On 2017-05-12, Stefan Bodewig wrote: >>> I'll run the tests myself to see what happens here. >> $ mvn test >> -Dtest=Zip64SupportIT#writeSmallStoredEntryKnownSizeToFileModeAlways >> -Prun-zipit >> ... >> Failed tests: >> >>Zip64SupportIT.writeSmallStoredEntryKnownSizeToFileModeAlways:1618->withTemporaryArchive:2323 >> arrays first differed at element [4]; expected:<64> but was:<-1> >> Tests run: 1, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0 >> I'll try to understand what's going on. > First data point, it has been failing since 1.11, it passes with 1.10. > I'll wade through the changes we've made to ZipArchiveOutputStream, at > first glance the test verifies what I'd expect the archive to contain. https://github.com/apache/commons-compress/pull/10 we forgot to adapt the test, will do so now. Given the test was wrong, not the implementation I think I don't need to cancel the vote. Stefan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org