The javac executable doesn't produce full paths for files on error

Bug #981037 reported by Apostolis Hardalias
10
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
openjdk-6 (Fedora)
Fix Released
Medium
openjdk-6 (Ubuntu)
Fix Released
Undecided
Unassigned
Precise
Fix Released
Undecided
Unassigned

Bug Description

It's the exact same "bug" that's reported over here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=789154

ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 12.04
Package: openjdk-6-jdk 6b24-1.11.1-4ubuntu1
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 3.2.0-23.36-generic 3.2.14
Uname: Linux 3.2.0-23-generic x86_64
NonfreeKernelModules: nvidia wl
ApportVersion: 2.0.1-0ubuntu2
Architecture: amd64
Date: Fri Apr 13 21:23:39 2012
ProcEnviron:
 TERM=xterm
 PATH=(custom, no user)
 LANG=en_US.UTF-8
 SHELL=/bin/bash
SourcePackage: openjdk-6
UpgradeStatus: No upgrade log present (probably fresh install)

Revision history for this message
In , Mike (mike-redhat-bugs) wrote :

Description of problem:

The latest version of javac produces error messages that no longer display the full path of the file containing the errors. This means that the error message no longer unambiguously identifies the offending file as soon as there is a collision in the leaf file names in a java project.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

java-1.6.0-openjdk-devel-1.6.0.0-63.1.11.fc16.*

How reproducible:

Always.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. mkdir tmp; echo "bar" > tmp/foo.java
2. javac tmp/foo.java

Actual results:

foo.java:1: reached end of file while parsing
bar
^
1 error

Expected results:

tmp/foo.java:1: reached end of file while parsing
bar
^
1 error

Additional info:

java-1.6.0-openjdk-devel-1.6.0.0-59.1.10.3.fc16.* produces the expected result above, so for now, yum downgrade allows me to work around this problem. Not a long term solution of course. A better workaround would be if there is a command line option to restore the full path, but I was unable to find any.

There are two reasons this is really a bug and not just a cosmetic issue.

1. I have to deal with some medium-to-large Java projects where the leaf file names are far from unique. Indeed there are some places where there is a directory containing subdirectories which in turn contain files with standardized identical names (50+ and growing of them). The old error message unambiguously identified the broken file. The new one leaves me guessing.
Changing the naming convention is outside my area of responsibility, its `other people's code'.

2. This kills any possibility for an editor to parse the error messages and bring up the offending source/line. Please understand that not everybody uses eclipse!

IMHO the best solution to this problem is to revert the change.

See also http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=638805

Revision history for this message
In , Deepak (deepak-redhat-bugs) wrote :

Assigning to Pavel.

Pavel, I looked into the issue and it looks like it is being caused due to this patch:
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/distro-pkg-dev/2011-March/013178.html

Can you please take a look when you have time?

Revision history for this message
In , Andrew (andrew-redhat-bugs) wrote :

Hmmm, as I recall, that patch was introduced specifically to fix this problem. But indeed, testing with 1.11 suggests it doesn't.

I'll check if removing the patch makes HEAD's behave match 7. If so, I'll commit the change.

Revision history for this message
In , Andrew (andrew-redhat-bugs) wrote :

Indeed, removing the patch does give the same behaviour as in previous releases, including not only 1.10, but 1.9 and 1.8. I was under the impression that this patch was added because 1.10 (to which it was going to be backported, but seemingly never was) changed the behaviour, compared to other releases. But these results suggest not.

Let's see what Pavel has to say. I think there was a TCK issue involved, which may since have been excluded, so some of this may have to happen internally.

Revision history for this message
In , Andrew (andrew-redhat-bugs) wrote :

For the benefit of public users, Pavel confirmed that the TCK issues surrounding this patch have been resolved through other means so the patch can be dropped.

Pavel, can you remove the patch from HEAD and the 1.11 branch? I'll approve on the mailing list. Thanks.

Revision history for this message
In , Pavel (pavel-redhat-bugs) wrote :

Of course, I'll do it. Thank you.

Revision history for this message
In , Andrew (andrew-redhat-bugs) wrote :

Thanks Pavel.

Revision history for this message
Apostolis Hardalias (hardalias) wrote :
Revision history for this message
Martin Pitt (pitti) wrote : Please test proposed package

Hello Apostolis, or anyone else affected,

Accepted openjdk-6 into precise-proposed. The package will build now and be available in a few hours. Please test and give feedback here. See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation how to enable and use -proposed. Thank you in advance!

Changed in openjdk-6 (Ubuntu Precise):
status: New → Fix Committed
tags: added: verification-needed
Revision history for this message
Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote :

Could you verify that the update fixes the issue you report? It will not be moved out of the staging otherwise...

Revision history for this message
Apostolis Hardalias (hardalias) wrote : Re: [Bug 981037] Re: The javac executable doesn't produce full paths for files on error

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 17/05/2012 07:46 μμ, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> Could you verify that the update fixes the issue you report? It will not
> be moved out of the staging otherwise...
>

The problem has been resolved. Thank you.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPtS6iAAoJEL5M5zy0M1diVI8H/jty5B0CPdqDdVcVbCUIA5Lv
iLt2w1DnfLxASyDU3cIANoScBfkO9Ug5jgkEUiovBRxF4bAPg9C0q2YOxhWHSMMF
S+aZTNwbNbGZikCiv/qMYzZMkTIu8R0l6T9mr6YFUfpS25B4kjgzsVCJxbP+kiQZ
HEwgphYEXQ9VtbwhTrtbLD3CxazNjnYndd0sCVGy0g5e2ppS8VfIgJzQfNE+9QjC
p5lKYFuxWgwQLkuksnLYxSXun8SnKC4rnxzAYTMnjuh/Y/I5QCxz7C6UUqkLLfDz
j7bDVSh+e9xUtC1khf4Q170s8DsR1Ff19nbn48PrgVy50do/BHXjhLPYLvU5uCg=
=webQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Martin Pitt (pitti)
tags: added: verification-done
removed: verification-needed
Revision history for this message
Launchpad Janitor (janitor) wrote :

This bug was fixed in the package openjdk-6 - 6b24-1.11.1-4ubuntu3

---------------
openjdk-6 (6b24-1.11.1-4ubuntu3) precise-proposed; urgency=low

  * Do not apply patches/revert-6885123.patch. Closes: #638805. LP: #981037.
  * Move hotspot-7020521.patch and hotspot-7026307.patch to debian/patches
    and reapply (accidentally disabled).
 -- Matthias Klose <email address hidden> Fri, 20 Apr 2012 14:38:21 +0200

Changed in openjdk-6 (Ubuntu):
status: Fix Committed → Fix Released
Changed in openjdk-6 (Ubuntu Precise):
status: Fix Committed → Fix Released
Changed in openjdk-6 (Fedora):
importance: Unknown → Medium
status: Unknown → Fix Released
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.