Hi Michelle,

please find the attached patch fixing JIRA JDO-96 (Error reading the JDO
Meta-Data file "org/apache/jdo/tck/pc/singlefieldidentity/package.jdo".
Cause : {1}). The patch adds a package JDO file to package
"org.apache.jdo.tck.pc.singlefieldidentity" for datastoreidentity. All
classes listed in that file have attribute "persistence-modifier" set to
"non-persistent".

Regards,
Michael
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Watzek                  Tech@Spree Engineering GmbH
mailto:mwa.tech@spree.de        Buelowstr. 66
Tel.:  ++49/30/235 520 36       10783 Berlin - Germany
Fax.:  ++49/30/217 520 12       http://www.spree.de/
-------------------------------------------------------------------

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Hi Craig,

I'll have to leave now and will check that tomorrow.

Do you mean the "org/apache/jdo/tck/pc/singlefieldidentity/package.jdo"
under directory applicationidentity?

Regards,
Michael

> Hi Michael,
>
> Thanks for the patch.
>
> Question: Why is the package.jdo file marked as "executable" in svn?
> Configuration error in your maven setup?
>
> Craig
>
> On Jul 26, 2005, at 6:04 AM, Michael Watzek wrote:
> 
>
> Craig Russell
>
> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
>
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
>
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
>


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Watzek                  Tech@Spree Engineering GmbH
mailto:mwa.tech@spree.de        Buelowstr. 66
Tel.:  ++49/30/235 520 36       10783 Berlin - Germany
Fax.:  ++49/30/217 520 12       http://www.spree.de/
-------------------------------------------------------------------

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Hi Craig,

I'm working under Windows.

Files which I create using Eclipse, File Explorer, or a Windows editor,
have access rights 777 by default. The same holds true for files, which
are created by the SUN JVM for Windows. For example, the log files
created under ".../tck20/target/logs/" have access rights 777.

Files which are created by svn, e.g. when I call "svn update", have
different access rights:

- Directories always have 777.
- Files which have been created by my patches have 666.
- All other files have 777.

Actually, I would have assumed the opposite: Files created by my patches
have 777 and all other files have 666. Have you changed the access
rights of newly created files explicitly before you commited my patches?

However, I do not know how to change the Windows default of file access
rights. We filed a ticket at Windows Hotline...

Regards,
Michael
> Hi Michael,
>
> On Jul 26, 2005, at 8:50 AM, Michael Watzek wrote:
> 
>
>
> I mean:
> 
>
>
> Why is it svn:executable?
>
> I noticed a number of such svn:executable but this is the first time I
> questioned it...
>
> Thanks,
>
> Craig
> 
>
> Craig Russell
>
> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
>
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
>
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
>


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Watzek                  Tech@Spree Engineering GmbH
mailto:mwa.tech@spree.de        Buelowstr. 66
Tel.:  ++49/30/235 520 36       10783 Berlin - Germany
Fax.:  ++49/30/217 520 12       http://www.spree.de/
-------------------------------------------------------------------

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Hi Craig,

Windows Hotline just closed the ticket. They were not able to answer the
question. So, has anybody an idea?

Regards,
Michael
> Hi Craig,
>
> I'm working under Windows.
>
> Files which I create using Eclipse, File Explorer, or a Windows editor,
> have access rights 777 by default. The same holds true for files, which
> are created by the SUN JVM for Windows. For example, the log files
> created under ".../tck20/target/logs/" have access rights 777.
>
> Files which are created by svn, e.g. when I call "svn update", have
> different access rights:
>
> - Directories always have 777.
> - Files which have been created by my patches have 666.
> - All other files have 777.
>
> Actually, I would have assumed the opposite: Files created by my patches
> have 777 and all other files have 666. Have you changed the access
> rights of newly created files explicitly before you commited my patches?
>
> However, I do not know how to change the Windows default of file access
> rights. We filed a ticket at Windows Hotline...
>
> Regards,
> Michael
> 
>
>


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Watzek                  Tech@Spree Engineering GmbH
mailto:mwa.tech@spree.de        Buelowstr. 66
Tel.:  ++49/30/235 520 36       10783 Berlin - Germany
Fax.:  ++49/30/217 520 12       http://www.spree.de/
-------------------------------------------------------------------

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Hi Craig,

> How about setting your umask?
Windows does not have a notion of umask like UNIX has. That's why we
tried to find out at Windows Hotline how to change the default for file
permissions.

> How about chmod -x for all the files you create before you svn diff?
chmod works for those Windows users who have CYGNUS tools installed (I
have). The problem is to recall that each time before performing svn
diff. I'll try to recall that in the future.

Regards,
Michael
>
> Craig
>
> On Jul 27, 2005, at 5:56 AM, Michael Watzek wrote:
> 
>
> Craig Russell
>
> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
>
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
>
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
>


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Watzek                  Tech@Spree Engineering GmbH
mailto:mwa.tech@spree.de        Buelowstr. 66
Tel.:  ++49/30/235 520 36       10783 Berlin - Germany
Fax.:  ++49/30/217 520 12       http://www.spree.de/
-------------------------------------------------------------------

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]