Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] [jakartaee-tck-dev] Notes on Signature Tests in standalone Batch TCK

Hi Scott,

I tried generating the batch signature file using older sig jar in jakartaee-tck repo for the jakarta.batch-api.jar in glassfish6.
Here is the diff I found slightly different than yours.

< #Signature file v4.1
---
> #Signature file v4.3
16c16
< meth public abstract !hasdefault java.lang.String name()
---
> meth public abstract !hasdefault java.lang.String name() value= ""

Regards,
Alwin

On 22/07/20 11:39 pm, Scott Kurz wrote:

Alwin,

Thanks for responding... I know I dumped a good bit of detail there, so let me just clarify I'm not trying to run with the latest sigtest.... I'm trying to run with the most convenient, which, for me, is the one already in Maven Central, unofficial though it may be..though it's older.

So rather than moving to the newer sigtestdev.jar used by the platform TCK, and having to fit it into my Maven build ... I'm asking does that really matter?
I could see the argument that each batch signature tests, respectively in platform vs. batch standalone TCK, is good enough.

I think you will face issue while running the batch standalone TCK sig test in versions higher than Java SE 8. Otherwise for the current state if you are able to generate the latest sig file and run the test successfully using the same sig jars it might not matter IMO.


And I'm realizing too that it would be great if the sigtest project would consider publishing the latest to Maven.... do you happen to know if there are any plans for that?

I dont know if sigtest will be published to Maven. But it is part of the OpenJDK project ( https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/CodeTools/sigtest )
It is possible to generate the latest versions of sigtest.jar and sigtestdev.jar by following https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/CodeTools/How+to+build.


Thanks
------------------------------------------------------
Scott Kurz
WebSphere Batch and Developer Experience
skurz@xxxxxxxxxx
--------------------------------------------------------

Inactive hide details for "Kevin Sutter" ---07/22/2020 11:23:31 AM---I believe this discussion is of interest to the TCK mailin"Kevin Sutter" ---07/22/2020 11:23:31 AM---I believe this discussion is of interest to the TCK mailing list as well.. -------------------------

From: "Kevin Sutter" <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: jakartaee-platform developer discussions <jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Eclipse Jakarta EE TCK Dev List <jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 07/22/2020 11:23 AM
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [jakartaee-tck-dev] [jakartaee-platform-dev] Notes on Signature Tests in standalone Batch TCK
Sent by: jakartaee-tck-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx




I believe this discussion is of interest to the TCK mailing list as well..


---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter
STSM, MicroProfile and Jakarta EE architect @ IBM
e-mail: sutter@xxxxxxxxxx Twitter: @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter



From: Alwin Joseph <alwin.joseph@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: Scott Kurz <skurz@xxxxxxxxxx>, jakartaee-platform developer discussions <jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 07/22/2020 10:03
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] Notes on Signature Tests in standalone Batch TCK
Sent by: jakartaee-platform-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx



Hi Scott,
We have upgraded the sigtest jars in jakartaee-tck to latest so the same can be used to run sig tests in Java SE 11 also. The "v4.3" is expected in the latest version. Is it possible to do the upgrade for sigtest jars used in standalone batch tck too.
I don't suppose there should be difference in the signature files otherwise. I will try to verify if the signature file in platform TCK needs any correction and needs to be matched with the standalone one.
Regards,
Alwin
On 22/07/20 7:41 pm, Scott Kurz wrote:
For the standalone Batch TCK, we have a signature test component, (in addition to the batch runtime execution tests).. which has been a requirement of TCKs since JCP and now in Jakarta.

The platform TCK has its own signature tests, including Batch as one component. At a high level, you'd think there wouldn't be differences between testing these same APIs standalone vs. in the platform TCK, so let me explain our approach in case there are any comments.

(If this is too boring a detail for anyone to care, then at least I left a paper trail if anyone has to look into this later)
--------------------

Anyway, the platform TCK checks in sigtestdev.jar, as source, as: https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/blob/master/lib/sigtestdev.jarbut I don't think it's now exposed as a Maven artifact., and
generates signature file: https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/blob/master/src/com/sun/ts/tests/signaturetest/signature-repository/jakarta.batch.sig_2.0_se8. I have seen doc like: https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/wiki/Signature-Tests-in-JakartaEE-TCKbut understand very little of how the platform TCK is dealing with signature files.

In the standalone batch TCK, where we use Maven, we have been using this unofficial release of sigtest since back in the JSR days: net.java.sigtest:sigtestdev:3.0-b12-v20140219

This appears to be use the "v4.1" internal signature format, whereas the sigtest in the platform TCK uses "v4.3".
One consequence: the platform TCK signature files can't be read and used in a standalone Batch TCK, since our sigtestdev JAR version is too old and doesn't recognize the newer format.

Here's a detailed diff:

$ diff -w standalone_se8 platform_se8
1c1
< #Signature file v4.1
---
> #Signature file v4.3
16c16
< meth public abstract !hasdefault java.lang.String name()
---
> meth public abstract !hasdefault java.lang.String name() value= ""
501c501,502
< hfds ZeroElementArray,ZeroStackTraceElementArray,cause,detailMessage,enableWritableStackTrace,serialVersionUID,stackTrace,suppressedExceptions,walkback
---
> hfds CAUSE_CAPTION,EMPTY_THROWABLE_ARRAY,NULL_CAUSE_MESSAGE,SELF_SUPPRESSION_MESSAGE,SUPPRESSED_CAPTION,SUPPRESSED_SENTINEL,UNASSIGNED_STACK,backtrace,cause,detailMessage,serialVersionUID,stackTrace,suppressedExceptions
> hcls PrintStreamOrWriter,SentinelHolder,WrappedPrintStream,WrappedPrintWriter

So my take is that the batch TCK's sigtest, using this older format and the unofficial sigtest is just fine.

Comments? Thanks,
------------------------------------------------------
Scott Kurz
WebSphere Batch and Developer Experience
skurz@xxxxxxxxxx
--------------------------------------------------------_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev


_______________________________________________
jakartaee-tck-dev mailing list
jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-tck-dev




_______________________________________________
jakartaee-tck-dev mailing list
jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-tck-dev

Back to the top