Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix build warnings and revert compiler workaround #3813

Merged
merged 5 commits into from May 10, 2024

Conversation

Bananeweizen
Copy link
Contributor

All commits except the last fix certain warnings that are shown during the build. See the commit messages for details.
The last commit is unrelated in the sense that it reverts a maven compiler workaround. However, sending it as separate PR would lead to a conflict, therefore it has been added here.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented May 4, 2024

Test Results

  594 files  ±0    594 suites  ±0   3h 37m 24s ⏱️ - 23m 9s
  420 tests ±0    413 ✅ ±0   7 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 
1 260 runs  ±0  1 238 ✅ ±0  22 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit 144e9d7. ± Comparison against base commit f2c6397.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

@laeubi
Copy link
Member

laeubi commented May 4, 2024

Seems one test is now failing

[INFO] Annotation processing is enabled because one or more processors
were found
  on the class path. A future release of javac may disable annotation
processing
  unless at least one processor is specified by name (-processor), or a
search
  path is specified (--processor-path, --processor-module-path), or
annotation
  processing is enabled explicitly (-proc:only, -proc:full).
  Use -Xlint:-options to suppress this message.
  Use -proc:none to disable annotation processing.
Unfortunately those values are not interchangeable anymore, when using
the release attribute.
The fix has been released in 3.12.1, we depend on 3.13.0 now.
@Bananeweizen
Copy link
Contributor Author

I left away the "source/target to release" commit. But I must admit that was just guessing. If it still fails, I will have to run integration tests locally (which I try to avoid).

@laeubi
Copy link
Member

laeubi commented May 8, 2024

@Bananeweizen do you want to squash or merge the individual commits?

Also for tycho4?

@Bananeweizen
Copy link
Contributor Author

There is nothing that would cause functional changes in Tycho itself, therefore this doesn't need to be ported. I tend to not squash independent changes, even though it means that all except the last have not been tested in isolation. If something comes up later, reverting one of the changes seems easier to me than reverse-engineering the original "splitting" of the squashed commit.

@Bananeweizen Bananeweizen merged commit e82043c into eclipse-tycho:main May 10, 2024
11 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants