[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [aspectj-users] aspectjrt.jar OSGi manifest
|
Looks like this is a slight misunderstanding.
I meant to use BND or Bundlor in the build script to generate the manifest every time. And test the resulting OSGi bundle in a real OSGi runtime just once (manually, before this is committed).
Is that OK with you?
Thank you.
> Hi,
>
>
>
>
> I'd be ok with a one time manual test to verify it is basically correct. I previously used bundlor but was not in a position to verify the output so I never committed it. Ideally I wanted to integrate bundlor invocation into the build process so that when occasionally a new package is added or one deleted, the manifest stays in step. Rather than just run bundlor once and commit those fixed manifests. However, if a 'one off run' is simplest then I'd be ok to use it for aspectjrt.jar as the package set for that hardly ever changes.
>
>
>
>
>
> cheers,
>
>
> Andy
>
>
>
>
>
> On 11 January 2013 11:11, M. P.
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I'd assume they have an environment in which to verify the correctness of what is being created.
>
>
> Do mean an automatic test suite or one-time manual testing?
>
> Automatic tests would be very nice but they would require serious machinery such as the OSGi runtime.
> And maybe these bundles (aspectrt, weaver, etc) are simple enough so that it is safe to assume that tools such as BND and Bundlor generate valid manifests?
>
> What do you think?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
>
> > The weaver also needs one (and I suppose it does no harm to get it right for tools and matcher too).
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > This has long been on the list of TODOs (see bugs like
>
> >
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=338034) - I even prototyped the implementation with bundlor (
>
> >
> http://www.springsource.org/bundlor). I created some basic versions for testing but I don't believe the users got back to me about whether what was being generated was correct. Traditionally users just seemed to go the EBR and collect the versions from there which had had their manifests regenerated. I'd be happy for someone to take this on and sort it out properly for AspectJ, I'm more than happy to help them progress it - I'd assume they have an environment in which to verify the correctness of what is being created.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > The AspectJ build process is a bit arcane, which can make something you'd think would be easy, rather tricky, but I'll help a brave soul battle through that.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > cheers,
>
> >
>
> > Andy
>
>
> > On 10 January 2013 06:51, M. P.
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
>
> >
>
> >> The aspectjrt.jar does not have a valid OSGi manifest at the moemnt. It would be nice if it did.
>
> >> In order to make it OSGi compliant the manifest should get a few more headers such as Export-Package.
>
> >> I saw that the aspectjrt.jar manifest is generated from this file
>
> >>
> http://git.eclipse.org/c/aspectj/org.aspectj.git/tree/aspectj5rt/aspectj5rt.mf.txt
>
> >> Since the packages listed in Export-Package should have versions adding this header to the manifest template is problemat because when the version placeholders are replaced with the real values the format of the manifest may become invalid.
>
> >> So how do you feel about generating the manifest in the build script via
>
> >>
> http://ant.apache.org/manual/Tasks/manifest.html?
>
> >>
>
> >> Thanks.
>
> >> _______________________________________________
>
> >> aspectj-users mailing list
>
> >>
> aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> >>
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> aspectj-users mailing list
>
> aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
