Bug 206606 - Junit for OSGi/Minimum-1.1 execution environment
Summary: Junit for OSGi/Minimum-1.1 execution environment
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Platform
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: Runtime (show other bugs)
Version: 3.3.1   Edit
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P3 enhancement (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: platform-runtime-inbox CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2007-10-17 07:55 EDT by Aldo Eisma CLA
Modified: 2019-09-06 16:04 EDT (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Aldo Eisma CLA 2007-10-17 07:55:11 EDT
In OHF we would like to be able to run junit 3.8 tests on Equinox on the OSGi/Minimum execution environments, but this is currently not possible as the org.junit plugin correctly specifies that J2SE is the minimum execution environment:
(1) junit.jar contains (utility) classes that depend on awt and swing packages that are not in this execution environment.
examples: junit.awt, junit.runner.TestCollector. 
(2) in a few places the implementation of junit depends on methods not in OSGi/Minimum.
example: the method compare(double, double) is undefined for the type Double, junit/framework/Assert.java, line 95, in junit 3.8.2 

This limitation could be removed by (a) amending the implementation for problem 2 and (b) splitting up junit.jar over two bundles such that the base bundle contains only the OSGi/Minimum compatible subset. 

As it may be undesirable to do so at the level of the platform, unless junit.org removes this limitation, the question is if we could work around this limitation by adding a new bundle with an OSGi/Minimum compatible subset of junit 3.8 to the OHF Device Kit project (or to Equinox).
Comment 1 Eclipse Webmaster CLA 2019-09-06 16:04:01 EDT
This bug hasn't had any activity in quite some time. Maybe the problem got resolved, was a duplicate of something else, or became less pressing for some reason - or maybe it's still relevant but just hasn't been looked at yet.

If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please add it. The information can be, for example, that the problem still occurs, that you still want the feature, that more information is needed, or that the bug is (for whatever reason) no longer relevant.