Here is the stack trace of the exception
java.util.ConcurrentModificationException.
Please check the build log for more details.
at org.apache.tools.ant.taskdefs.Exit.execute(Exit.java:162)
at org.apache.tools.ant.UnknownElement.execute(UnknownElement.java:292)
at sun.re
Original-Nachricht
Datum: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 21:56:04 +0100
Von: "Thomas Voigt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Original-Nachricht
> Datum: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 11:26:17 -0800 (PST)
> Von: Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > If you are
> > the adventurous type who wants to
Also as the lock is on the hashtable, no
new locks are added as the iteration
will use the same lock.
On 1/12/07, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--- Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matt Benson wrote:
> > I agree, Peter. However, the patch I am currently
> > testing adds sy
--- Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matt Benson wrote:
> > I agree, Peter. However, the patch I am currently
> > testing adds synchro blocks to all Hashtable
> copies in
> > PropertyHelper. :)
> >
> > -Matt
>
> Just as long as we don't get deadlocks.
>
>
> When I was updating the
Matt Benson wrote:
I agree, Peter. However, the patch I am currently
testing adds synchro blocks to all Hashtable copies in
PropertyHelper. :)
-Matt
Just as long as we don't get deadlocks.
When I was updating the diagnostics for Ant1.7.1 when a task doesnt get
found, the IDE (intellij) wa
Original-Nachricht
Datum: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 11:26:17 -0800 (PST)
Von: Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
An: Ant Users List
Betreff: Re: ConcurrentModificationException
> Thomas, some synchronization checks have been added
> which fix the problem in my test (I
>
> On 1/11/07, Thomas Voigt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Original-Nachricht ----
> > Datum: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 11:23:50 -0600
> > Von: "Andrew Close" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > An: "Ant Users List&
--- Thomas Voigt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Original-Nachricht
> Datum: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 10:40:42 -0800 (PST)
> Von: Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> An: Ant Users List
> Betreff: Re: ConcurrentModificationException
&
Hi,
Original-Nachricht
Datum: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 19:13:30 +
Von: "Peter Reilly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
An: "Ant Users List"
Betreff: Re: ConcurrentModificationException
> Looking at the code and the stack error, the following patch may
> fix th
Hi,
Original-Nachricht
Datum: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 10:40:42 -0800 (PST)
Von: Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
An: Ant Users List
Betreff: Re: ConcurrentModificationException
> Hi--
> there appear to be synchronization issues around Ant's
> properties. Here, s
Nachricht
> > Datum: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 11:23:50 -0600
> > Von: "Andrew Close" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > An: "Ant Users List"
> > Betreff: Re: ConcurrentModificationException
> >
> > > On 1/11/07, Thomas Voigt <[EMAIL PROTEC
n: "Andrew Close" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
An: "Ant Users List"
Betreff: Re: ConcurrentModificationException
> On 1/11/07, Thomas Voigt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > we recently started to get ConcurrentModificationExceptions with
Hi,
Original-Nachricht
Datum: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 11:23:50 -0600
Von: "Andrew Close" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
An: "Ant Users List"
Betreff: Re: ConcurrentModificationException
> On 1/11/07, Thomas Voigt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> &g
Hi--
there appear to be synchronization issues around Ant's
properties. Here, setting a property (I imagine) and
getting all properties () in
can sometimes throw the comod exception. A
possible workaround would be to use inheritAll="false"
(true is default) and specify only the properties you
ne
On 1/11/07, Thomas Voigt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
we recently started to get ConcurrentModificationExceptions with ant. We use
ant 1.7 and ant-contrib 1.02b2 with jdk 1.5.0_07 (the same error occurs with
jdk 1.5.0_10) on Windows Server 2003.
are you testing this script out on your si
15 matches
Mail list logo
