I'm pretty sure this was the result of forkCount > 1. Multiple forks all tried to grab the port, and all but one failed. is this really desirable? Should debugForkedTest force the fork count to 1?
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 12:10 AM, Kristian Rosenvold <[email protected]> wrote: > Reboot & retry. > > K > 9. jul. 2015 3.16 a.m. skrev "Benson Margulies" <[email protected]>: > >> Port 5005 is NOT in use, but I get the following. What's up? >> >> SUREFIRE-859: FATAL ERROR in native method: JDWP No transports >> initialized, jvmtiError=AGENT_ERROR_TRANSPORT_INIT(197) >> ERROR: transport error 202: bind failed: Address already in use >> SUREFIRE-859: ERROR: JDWP Transport dt_socket failed to initialize, >> TRANSPORT_INIT(510) >> JDWP exit error AGENT_ERROR_TRANSPORT_INIT(197): No transports >> initialized [../../../src/share/back/debugInit.c:750] >> SUREFIRE-859: /bin/sh: line 1: 15757 Abort trap: 6 >> >> /Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk1.7.0_72.jdk/Contents/Home/jre/bin/java >> -Dfile.encoding=utf-8 -Xmx2g -Xdebug -Xnoagent -Djava.compiler=NONE >> -Xrunjdwp:transport=dt_socket,server=y,suspend=y,address=5005 -jar >> >> /Users/benson/x/ws-bus/cat-processor/target/surefire/surefirebooter7582106457705119502.jar >> >> /Users/benson/x/ws-bus/cat-processor/target/surefire/surefire6601527055224800422tmp >> >> /Users/benson/x/ws-bus/cat-processor/target/surefire/surefire_06588360548170775574tmp >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
