History | Log In     View a printable version of the current page.  
Issue Details (XML | Word | Printable)

Key: LBCORE-160
Type: Bug Bug
Status: Open Open
Priority: Major Major
Assignee: Logback dev list
Reporter: Joern Huxhorn
Votes: 0
Watchers: 0
Operations

If you were logged in you would be able to see more operations.
logback-core

TimeBasedRollingWithArchiveRemovalTest keeps failing

Created: 27/Jul/10 03:56 PM   Updated: 29/Dec/10 02:16 PM
Component/s: Appender
Affects Version/s: unspecified
Fix Version/s: None

Environment:
Apache Maven 2.2.1 (r801777; 2009-08-06 21:16:01+0200)
Java version: 1.6.0_20
Java home: /System/Library/Frameworks/JavaVM.framework/Versions/1.6.0/Home
Default locale: en_US, platform encoding: MacRoman
OS name: "mac os x" version: "10.6.4" arch: "x86_64" Family: "mac"


 Description  « Hide
Revision: 15b5239b5d583a86877b79e77336729317cf2dc0

The following error happens every time I try to build Logback:

dailySizeBasedRollover(ch.qos.logback.core.rolling.TimeBasedRollingWithArchiveRemovalTest) Time elapsed: 0.443 sec <<< ERROR!
java.util.concurrent.TimeoutException
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask$Sync.innerGet(FutureTask.java:228)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.get(FutureTask.java:91)
at ch.qos.logback.core.rolling.TimeBasedRollingWithArchiveRemovalTest.waitForCompression(TimeBasedRollingWithArchiveRemovalTest.java:216)
at ch.qos.logback.core.rolling.TimeBasedRollingWithArchiveRemovalTest.doRollover(TimeBasedRollingWithArchiveRemovalTest.java:206)
at ch.qos.logback.core.rolling.TimeBasedRollingWithArchiveRemovalTest.dailySizeBasedRollover(TimeBasedRollingWithArchiveRemovalTest.java:146)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39)
at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25)
at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:597)
at org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod$1.runReflectiveCall(FrameworkMethod.java:44)
at org.junit.internal.runners.model.ReflectiveCallable.run(ReflectiveCallable.java:15)
at org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod.invokeExplosively(FrameworkMethod.java:41)
at org.junit.internal.runners.statements.InvokeMethod.evaluate(InvokeMethod.java:20)
at org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunBefores.evaluate(RunBefores.java:28)
at org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunAfters.evaluate(RunAfters.java:31)
at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:76)
at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:50)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.run(ParentRunner.java:193)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:52)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:191)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$000(ParentRunner.java:42)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:184)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:236)
at org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4TestSet.execute(JUnit4TestSet.java:62)
at org.apache.maven.surefire.suite.AbstractDirectoryTestSuite.executeTestSet(AbstractDirectoryTestSuite.java:140)
at org.apache.maven.surefire.suite.AbstractDirectoryTestSuite.execute(AbstractDirectoryTestSuite.java:127)
at org.apache.maven.surefire.Surefire.run(Surefire.java:177)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39)
at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25)
at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:597)
at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.SurefireBooter.runSuitesInProcess(SurefireBooter.java:345)
at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.SurefireBooter.main(SurefireBooter.java:1009)


 All   Comments   Change History   Subversion Commits      Sort Order: Ascending order - Click to sort in descending order
Joern Huxhorn - 29/Dec/10 02:16 PM
The last few builds didn't fail anymore but I'd like to keep this issue open for some time since the failing wasn't very reliable anyway.
I'll keep an eye on this and will let you know how this develops...