On 17/03/21 3:10 pm, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
Hello Alan,
On 17/03/21 2:45 pm, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 17/03/2021 08:21, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
:
I can confirm that using "NUL" or "nul" work fine in the above code,
I don't know the context for your question
A while back Apache Ant switched to using the
Files.newInputStream/Files.newOutputStream construct as a replacement
for the FileInputStream and FileOutputStream constructors[1]. That
commit seems to have introduced an regression in Ant as noted here[2].
It appears that users of Ant were using "nul" (and even "nul:") as
destination file to have Ant write the data to that destination.
Internally Ant constructs an instance of java.io.File from the user
provided path string ("nul" or "nul:" in this case) and constructs a
OutputStream out of it. Previously (before we made that commit in
Ant), it would be using the FileOutputStream constructor (and would
succeed) and now it uses the Files.newOuputStream(...) which expects a
Path instance and this where our usage of java.io.File.toPath() ran
into the issue I note in this mail, when I started investigating this.
I didn't mention this context in my mail because the error noted in
those user reports is surprisingly a bit different than what I have
seen in my experiments on Windows and I don't think I have so far
narrowed it down to a JDK issue (if any). In their case, it appears
the call went past the issue we are discussing this mail and instead
failed later with something like:
java.nio.file.FileSystemException: E:\nul: Incorrect function.
at
sun.nio.fs.WindowsException.translateToIOException(WindowsException.java:86)
at
sun.nio.fs.WindowsException.rethrowAsIOException(WindowsException.java:97)
at
sun.nio.fs.WindowsException.rethrowAsIOException(WindowsException.java:102)
at
sun.nio.fs.WindowsFileSystemProvider.newByteChannel(WindowsFileSystemProvider.java:230)
at
java.nio.file.spi.FileSystemProvider.newOutputStream(FileSystemProvider.java:434)
at java.nio.file.Files.newOutputStream(Files.java:216)
I'm not yet sure how they managed to get to that stage and am waiting
to see if they can provide us with a reproducible build file to
reproduce this.
FWIW - that bug report states that they ran into this even when using
"nul" and not just "nul:". So there might be something more going on
here and am just waiting to see if they can provide us a build file to
reproduce this issue.
-Jaikiran
