Missed one out - changing the scenario module worked for building from kato.tck down but not from the root kato project. I missed out the anttasks project. Added the junit dep to the plugin deps and away we go.
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 3:39 PM, Steve Poole <[email protected]>wrote: > Weird bug and solution (or work around anyway) > > When building the kato.tck.execution.cjvmti module we invoke an ant > script that uses Junit. > > When you run "mvm install" in the project directory it works ok. So does > running in the parent kato.tck.execution module. BUT - when you get to > kato.tck or higher you get this error message: > --- > [INFO] An Ant BuildException has occured: The following error occurred > while executing this line: > C:\Documents and > Settings\spoole\workspace-maven\kato\kato.tck\execution\cjvmti\src\test\ant\test.xml:37: > Problem: failed to create task or type junit > Cause: the class org.apache.tools.ant.taskdefs.optional.junit.JUnitTask was > not found. > This looks like one of Ant's optional components. > Action: Check that the appropriate optional JAR exists in > -ANT_HOME\lib > -the IDE Ant configuration dialogs > > Do not panic, this is a common problem. > The commonest cause is a missing JAR. > > This is not a bug; it is a configuration problem > > -- > I had the right deps but they were not being honoured. Eventally after > some trial and error , divide and conquer etc I finally found a solution. I > don't know if this is just serendipity or not. > > Basically when kato.tck executes it builds the scenario modules and they > also use the ant plugin. It seems that the plugin path for the ant plugin > is set on* first use* and is not changeable. Net effect is that to get > when you run mvn install in the target module directly the ant plugin takes > the config from the local pom and works. Once you move up to a level in > the heirachy where another instance of the plugin is used you break! > > The solution for me is to add in a hack dependency to junit in the other > instances of the ant plugin. This is not good but I can't figure out if > this is intended behaviour or not. (can't see why it should be so I assume > this is either a bug or I'm missing something fundamental) > > > > -- > Steve > -- Steve
