RFR 8181299/10, Several jdk tests fail with java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: jdk/test/lib/process/StreamPumper
daniel.fuchs at oracle.com
Thu Jun 1 08:56:09 UTC 2017
This looks much better to me.
On 01/06/2017 04:27, Felix Yang wrote:
> Hi Chris and Daniel,
> new webrev with a few of explicit builds than wildcard.
> On 2017/5/31 18:20, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>>> On 31 May 2017, at 10:42, Felix Yang<felix.yang at oracle.com> wrote:
>>> Hi there,
>>> please review the patch to various jdk tests to explicitly compiling test libraries and the lib's dependencies. Though it could be a jtreg issue (I think so), it is necessary to get the tests running firstly.
>> This may be ok to get the tests running again, but explicit build targets
>> would be better. The contents, and module dependencies, from classes
>> in the test library are subject to change, so building all classes may
>> require more modules than in the @modules tags in the test.
> With latest webrev, no new @modules introduced by this change, though I
> fixed a missing from original tests.
> I prefer to keep "@build jdk.test.lib.process.*" here. Because, with
> current test lib package layout, "@build jdk.test.lib.process.*" equals
> /@build jdk.test.lib.process.OutputAnalyzer
> ///jdk.test.lib.process.ExitCode/ /"
> It is a bit ugly and not productive, when I only use ProcessTools
> directly but have to declare a bunch of @builds. That is why I think
> this is not a fix but a workaround.
>> I agree with Daniel, each test should be run separately in a clean
>> environment, to verify that it can build the necessary dependencies.
> This is actually not the case. I executed repeatedly each test works
> well separately. The problem occurs when there are more and more tests
> using the same test libs.
> As stated in the bugs  and , if there are multi tests using a lib,
> such as ProcessTools, there could be possible collision occurring on its
> For ProcessTools, StreamPumper (ONLY) will be disappear sometimes. It
> looks some dependency classes were treated by jtreg as some-how shared,
> and removed unexpectedly.
>  https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8181299
>  https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/CODETOOLS-7901986.
>> This may be a straight forward way to identify explicit build dependencies
>> and avoid the wildcards.
More information about the core-libs-dev