forked from christ66/cobertura
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 276
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
Cobertura fails to build with Java9 #271
Comments
I'm seeing a similar error using cobertura as a maven plugin with JDK-9.
|
tools.jar was indeed removed in JDK 9. All the details are in JEP 220. JDK 9 Early Access builds were available since late 2014 with this change (to give tools that depend on it as much time as possible to digest the change). |
keeganwitt
added a commit
to groovy/GMavenPlus
that referenced
this issue
May 5, 2019
Cobertura still doesn't support Java > 8 cobertura/cobertura#271 mojohaus/cobertura-maven-plugin#30
gkoudjou
added a commit
to gkoudjou/primesum
that referenced
this issue
Jul 1, 2019
There is a know bug in cobertura with Java 9 See cobertura/cobertura#271
gkoudjou
added a commit
to gkoudjou/primesum
that referenced
this issue
Jul 2, 2019
There is a know bug in cobertura with Java 9 See cobertura/cobertura#271 Update badge in README file Update pom for jacoco plugin
eis
added a commit
to eis/spring-boot-security-example
that referenced
this issue
Jan 1, 2021
Cobertura apparently hasn't had java 9+ support ever and still does not. Jacoco can perform the same functionality, so we go with that. cobertura/cobertura#271 mojohaus/cobertura-maven-plugin#30 https://stackoverflow.com/questions/43630262/how-to-exclude-a-direct-dependency-of-a-maven-plugin Fixes #3.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
When attempting to build current master (642a46e) with OpenJDK9 9~b80-2, it fails in Cobertura code coverage module with the following error message:
Since JDK9 will no longer include tools.jar, this should probably be looked into.
This was previously mentioned in #121 (by @mshuler and me), but I didn't see any replies so I've filed a separate issue now.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: