+1 to Dave's comment. I don't think we should be spending effort supporting compiling on an unsupported runtime environment. If something fails because it is too *nix-y then just skip that test with a local pom.xml override or something.
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Keith Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 10:16 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > So we are getting into an area where you want to compile the software on > a platform that is not supported. If you want to compile on an unsupported > platform, then I would suggest just ignoring the tests that won't work on > that system. > > My thought on this is that if changes to make it work on windows > improve the test and/or build process, then thats good. On the other > hand I would be opposed to making test and/or build more complex > inorder to support windows. I would define increasing complexity as > making it more difficult to run, maintain, or improve the test and/or > build process. > > > > > I don't think that this needs to be changed now as Hadoop only supports > *nix based systems and we are close to a 1.5.0 release. If you want to > tackle this in 1.6 (trunk) thats a different story. > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "David Medinets" <[email protected]> > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 10:08:48 PM > > Subject: Re: Using powermock-api-mockito in tests? > > > > I hate ignoring things. It makes me uneasy. I'm looking at the other > > tests as well. For example, the AccumuloDFSBase class depends on > > running /bin/sh to find a umask. No reason that dependency can't be > > mocked out during testing... If nothing else, this research will form > > my own set of Accumulo Zen Koans. > > > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 10:03 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Take a look at my other email on this subject, it might be better to > just add the profile that I mentioned and add this to the list of ignored > tests for now. I know that there is a ticket for removing ACCUMULO_HOME in > all places. > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "David Medinets" <[email protected]> > >> To: [email protected] > >> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 9:58:18 PM > >> Subject: Re: Using powermock-api-mockito in tests? > >> > >> Dave, you were very close. Here is the mocking code that I used. > >> > >> Map<String, String> mockSystemProperties = new HashMap<String, > String>(); > >> mockSystemProperties.put("ACCUMULO_HOME", System.getenv("HOME")); > >> > >> PowerMock.mockStaticPartial(System.class, "getenv"); > >> > EasyMock.expect(System.getenv()).andReturn(mockSystemProperties).anyTimes(); > >> > EasyMock.expect(System.getenv("ACCUMULO_XTRAJARS")).andReturn("").anyTimes(); > >> PowerMock.replayAll(); > >> > >> I'd like write a JIRA ticket and commit this code. I'll wait until > >> tomorrow for feedback though. No rush for this kind of change. > >> > >> The message that started this investigation was: > >> > >> > testDefaultConfig(org.apache.accumulo.start.classloader.vfs.AccumuloVFSClassLoaderTest): > >> Could not find file with URI "/lib/ext/[^.].*.jar" because it is a > >> relative path, and no base URI was provided. > >> > >> It occured on line 135 of AccumuloVFSClassLoader.java because > >> ACCUMULO_HOME was blank and therefore no base URI was provided. >
