On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 21:31:50 -1000, Aaron Kagawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 05:20 PM 3/8/2005, you wrote:
> >I concur that the problem is now fixed. Yay!
>
> I sort of spoke to soon. I found a couple more issues. By the way.. the
> reason why I'm so interested in Jblanket all of a sudden is because I have
> to upgrade another large system that uses Jblanket by every developer in
> every build. So, I want to ensure that things are ok before starting the
> upgrade process.

Sounds like a good idea.  What's the system?

> Each of these problems were check on two different computers.
>
> Problem 1.
> [jblanketreport] [Fatal Error] COVER-MethodSets.xml:86:88: The value of
> attribute "method" associated with an element type "Method" must not contain 
> the
> '<' character.
> [jblanketreport] csdl.jblanket.JBlanketException: Unable to transform XML
> to HTML

Hmm.  This one is definitely fixed.  That's what broke the Hackystat
build over the weekend.  Are you sure you've got the latest
jblanket.jar?  Are you sure it's the only version of the jar available
in the classpath?

I just downloaded the one from the website, and this is what I get for
diagnostics.

C:\>  java -jar jblanket.jar SysInfo
JBlanket Release: @release@

C:\> md5sum jblanket.jar
4dca1d8372e040cfe3751ba355187a2c *jblanket.jar

So it looks like the release tag wasn't included in the build of the
JBlanket jar, but you can check the md5sum to see if you're using the
one from the website.  If you don't have the 'md5sum' executable, then
you can download it here, http://unxutils.sourceforge.net/.

> --------------------------------------------------
>
> Problem 2.
> When I sent a previous email, stating that "I concurred that the problem
> was fixed" I didn't do a junitAll. Philip did you do one?
>
> Here is another problem that I've found. this is major a one. I've noticed
> that when I enable Jblanket the building and testing (freshStart junitAll)
> there is an significant increase (more than 80 minutes on my brand new 3.4
> Ghz computer) in the testing time. Here is my supporting data.

I haven't done any testing of my own with JBlanket's overhead, but
this sounds pretty serious. Our project currently can't use JBlanket
since we've switched over to using only JDK 1.5 (we use Eclipse
3.1m5a), so I can't check it on any large project.

The more I've worked with the JBlanket code, the more I think it's
nearing time to try a new architecture.  Given the pain that's
happened here, I certainly won't just spring it on anyone.

> --------------------------------------------------
>
> I'm going to try to upgrade CLEW (the other large web application) with
> Jdom1.0 and the new Jblanket. What's strange is that this web application
> did not take forever when running Jblanket before the upgrade. I am
> wondering if CLEW's testing time will go up or stay the same.
>
> Sorry for finding more bad news.

It's always better to know the bad news as early as possible, so no
problem. :-)  I'm interested in seeing how the CLEW application
upgrade goes, and also hear back about which jblanket.jar(s) you
found.

Thanks,

--Tim

Reply via email to