This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.
It looks like recent changes to ProxyLookup introduced a random bug where items are not visible when looked up by Lookup.Result.allInstances(). In my case the ProxyLookup is composed of Folder and custom AbstractLookup (afaik I don't plumb these together explicitly). Instances stored in ServerInstanceProviderLookup (j2eeserver, lookup registered in layer) are sometimes not visible when queried from RootNode (server module) via Lookups.forPath(path).lookupResult(ServerInstanceProvider.class).allItems(). So server nodes are missing in the UI.
Created attachment 117403 [details] quick fix This quick fix seems to solve an issue to give you an idea what might be wrong.
Jirka has similar problem in DB tests. After disabling the caches, his problem also disappears.
*** Bug 210514 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment from bug 210514: > A step to reproduce - just run > db/test/org.netbeans.modules.db.explorer.DatabaseConnectionTest
*** Bug 210622 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Revision 94b01928cb3d is fine, revision 5feee5505c73 $ hg log -r 5feee5505c73:94b01928cb3d openide.util.lookup changeset: 214274:5feee5505c73 user: Jesse Glick <jglick@netbeans.org> date: Fri Mar 02 20:14:31 2012 -0500 summary: Suppressing Kind.NOTE messages in processors as they just tend to clutter already lengthy compiler output. changeset: 214473:b0fba5722029 branch: IterativeProxyIterator209322 user: Jaroslav Tulach <jtulach@netbeans.org> date: Thu Mar 08 14:29:45 2012 +0100 summary: First step towards iterative iterator. Making the collections ready for laziness. changeset: 214474:df21bceaa1d4 branch: IterativeProxyIterator209322 user: Jaroslav Tulach <jtulach@netbeans.org> date: Thu Mar 08 14:32:13 2012 +0100 summary: Encapsulate obtaining the template into a method changeset: 214475:604ca7c64e35 branch: IterativeProxyIterator209322 user: Jaroslav Tulach <jtulach@netbeans.org> date: Thu Mar 08 15:58:12 2012 +0100 summary: Lazy iterator for ProxyLookup.R.allXYZ changeset: 214622:49f78bc9c543 branch: IterativeProxyIterator209322 parent: 214476:0dde69af399c user: Jaroslav Tulach <jtulach@netbeans.org> date: Fri Mar 09 10:14:24 2012 +0100 summary: Documenting the laziness as semantically incompatible change changeset: 214623:318f6e044a95 branch: IterativeProxyIterator209322 user: Jaroslav Tulach <jtulach@netbeans.org> date: Fri Mar 09 14:14:47 2012 +0100 summary: Modify the content of cache only if the iterator went through all proxy results changeset: 214625:94b01928cb3d user: Jaroslav Tulach <jtulach@netbeans.org> date: Fri Mar 09 14:22:22 2012 +0100 summary: It's 2012
This test used to pass in 5feee5505c73, but now it is broken: package org.openide.util.lookup; import org.openide.util.Lookup; public class ProxyProxyLookupTest extends ProxyLookupTest { public ProxyProxyLookupTest(String testName) { super(testName); } @Override public Lookup createLookup(Lookup lookup) { return new ProxyLookup(new ProxyLookup(lookup)); } public static ProxyProxyLookupTest suite() { return new ProxyProxyLookupTest("testDoubleAddIssue35274"); } }
*** Bug 210952 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
ergonomics#a3e4f5271879
it's not in main-silver yet
Integrated into 'main-golden', will be available in build *201204260400* on http://bits.netbeans.org/dev/nightly/ (upload may still be in progress) Changeset: http://hg.netbeans.org/main-golden/rev/a3e4f5271879 User: Jaroslav Tulach <jtulach@netbeans.org> Log: #210279: Before we use the cached values we need to call beforeLookup on all sub-results
*** Bug 211363 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
It's back. Servers randomly disappears in daily builds.
Recent regression might be caused by fix for bug 213325.
*** Bug 213901 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
The original occurrence of this bug was also manifested by running a db test and seeing the failure. I've just executed all db tests and none of them failed. That is why I don't think this is the same bug. That is why we have to start the evaluation again. Leaving the old priority and comments in the bug is just confusing. Closing as fixed, open new bug. With steps to reproduce.