[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-3829?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12624620#action_12624620
]
Knut Anders Hatlen commented on DERBY-3829:
-------------------------------------------
The changes to assertExecJavaCmdAsExpected() seem to have been incorporated
correctly. Thanks!
One minor comment (not important enough to hold the commit) is that I think the
three new methods in BaseTestCase could be static. That would allow them to be
used in more contexts than if they're not static.
Another minor issue (copied from the existing code, not introduced here) is
that the catch block in execJavaCmd() casts pe.getException() to
SecurityException, but since SecurityException is a RuntimeException, it's
never going to be wrapped in a PrivilegedActionException. (Some may say that
it's better if the test code doesn't unwrap the PrivilegedActionExceptions,
because that would simplify the code and the underlying cause would be reported
by JUnit anyway.)
> Convert derbynet/sysinfo and derbynet/sysinfo_with_properties to JUnit
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-3829
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-3829
> Project: Derby
> Issue Type: Test
> Components: Test
> Affects Versions: 10.5.0.0
> Reporter: Erlend Birkenes
> Assignee: Erlend Birkenes
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 10.5.0.0
>
> Attachments: Derby-3829_1.diff, Derby-3829_2.diff,
> DERBY-3829_m3.diff, DERBY-3829_m5.diff
>
>
> I'm guessing these two can be combined into one file
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
