after (finally) upgrading from ant 1.6.5 to ant 1.7.1 a teammate
discovered some strange behaviour =
He makes heavy use of antcall and uses the <record> task.
Now with ant 1.7.1 there are a lot of 0 byte lines in the logs,
his editor jumps automatically in hexmode when opening
such a logfile.
Compared to ant 1.6.5 several parts of the logs are missing - probably
overwritten by those 0 byte lines.
Whether heavy use of antcall is good or bad style, that behaviour of
<record> task in ant 1.7.1 is _very annoying_, as important parts of the
logs are missing now after the upgrade.
There was already a similar posting on the ant user list =
but got no repsone.
So, is that a known bug among other users|developers, didn't find a
record in the bug database ?
Maybe it's already patched in repository !?
Any suggestions or workarounds ??
To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com
[Ant-user] ant 1.7.1 bug in <record> with antcall !?
- Grimm, Markus: Hi Gilbert, at that time I found a workaround for my problem at http://marc.info/?l=ant-user&m=123900769210029&w=2 If we look at the same sample script, so you have to open the log-file in the first target, that is executed and close it in the last target: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> Now it works! Hope that helps... I don't know if it's a bug or feature. Recently I was reading an article about announcing bugs in open source projects. Many people criticize that bugs won't be fixed but
- Gilbert Rebhan: Hi Markus, Grimm, Markus schrieb: thanks for your response, the workmate changed his scripts like that : before with ant 1.6.5 = of the log to ../logs/someotherfilename.log of the log to ../logs/someotherfilename.log ... etc. so he never called to have the output from also into the logfile now after the problems when upgrading to ant 1.7.1, he tried : of the log to ../logs/someotherfilename.log of the log to ../logs/someotherfilename.log ... etc. and now it works for him, but only if he uses ,
- Grimm, Markus: Hi Gilbert, I think this could be the appropriate issue in the bug database: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41368 So it doesn't seem to be fixed in the current ant release ?! But there's a patch to fix the problem, too ... Thanks, Markus -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Gilbert Rebhan Gesendet: Mittwoch, 10. Juni 2009 22:07 An: Ant Users List Betreff: Re: AW: ant 1.7.1 bug in with antcall !? Hi Markus, Grimm, Markus schrieb: thanks for your response, the workmate