[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Using the cool new mirroring app I could also mirror the product out the
of pde-created repo creating a new repo that only contained IUs I wanted
in there.. :)
-----Original Message-----
From: Haigermoser, Helmut
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2009 3:47 PM
To: P2 developer discussions
Subject: RE: [p2-dev] root files
Ciao Mark :)
Nope, that's not what I'm after, I'm saying that the documented
behaviour, "If your root feature does not containg the bin.includes
property, then it will not be included in the final build results, but
the root files will be." is not true anymore.
My root feature does get included in the final build results, and that's
not what 3.4 did. Right now it's even worse because not only does my
feature get exposed to my customers, the root content does not end up
being referenced by my product anymore. However, that's a different bug
I was able to create a bugzilla for.
Long story short, I need to polish my feature just in case somebody
pokes around my repos; again, I liked the documented approach more.. :)
HTH,
Ciao, hh
-----Original Message-----
From: p2-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:p2-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Mark Melvin
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2009 3:38 PM
To: P2 developer discussions
Subject: RE: [p2-dev] root files
Hi Helmut,
A feature group is always created and is also expected behavior. You
will notice the feature group does not have a child "feature.jar" IU.
This is what gets created (and what is installed as an Eclipse feature)
when you add a bin.includes.
Try adding this to the top of your p2.inf, or if you do not have a
p2.inf in your feature, create a new one containing these two lines:
properties.1.name=org.eclipse.equinox.p2.type.group
properties.1.value=false
I think the feature group IU is always created (I have not used P2 with
Eclipse 3.4), but this will prevent it from showing up in the list of
installable items in the UI if it is not included in a category (for a
categorized P2 repo). I assume this is what you are after. There are
previous posts by me on this (see posts with subject "Categories") and
also Ian's blog post:
http://eclipsesource.com/blogs/2009/05/08/categorize-your-repository/
I hope this helps,
Mark.
--------------------------------------------
> -----Original Message-----
> From: p2-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:p2-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Haigermoser, Helmut
> Sent: May 26, 2009 9:19 AM
> To: P2 developer discussions
> Subject: RE: [p2-dev] root files
>
> Ciao Mark :)
> I've been using this with p2 3.4 for a year now without complains, so
> yes, this works pretty nicely! :)
>
> In 3.5 however, I'm getting this in my content.xml:
> <unit id='com.windriver.p2.installer.rootfiles.win32.feature.group'
> version='2.1.0' singleton='false'>
> <update
> id='com.windriver.p2.installer.rootfiles.win32.feature.group'
> range='[0.0.0,2.1.0)' severity='0'/>
> <properties size='5'>
> <property name='org.eclipse.equinox.p2.name'
> value='Win32_feature Feature'/>
> <property name='org.eclipse.equinox.p2.description'
> value='[Enter Feature Description here.]'/>
> <property name='org.eclipse.equinox.p2.description.url'
> value='http://www.example.com/description'/>
> <property name='org.eclipse.equinox.p2.provider'
> value='WINDRIVER'/>
> <property name='org.eclipse.equinox.p2.type.group'
> value='true'/>
>
>
> All of a sudden my feature was published this way, I now need to care
> about the feature name, the provider string, the description etc.
> The unit does not even end up being referenced in the product I'm
> exporting, it just gets published into the context.xml and thus ends
> up being visible to others..
>
> Nothing big, I know, but a change in behaviour nonetheless...
> HTH,
> Ciao, hh
> -----Original Message-----
> From: p2-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:p2-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mark Melvin
> Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2009 1:58 PM
> To: P2 developer discussions
> Subject: RE: [p2-dev] root files
>
> Hi Helmut,
>
> Having used P2 for awhile now I can confirm that it does indeed behave
> as documented. If you do not include a bin.includes property, but do
> include a root files property there is no feature JAR generated. If
> you are seeing something different I would think there is something
> else going on. Can you provide any more details on your root feature?
>
> M.
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: p2-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Haigermoser, Helmut
> Sent: Tue 26/05/2009 3:50 AM
> To: P2 developer discussions
> Subject: RE: [p2-dev] root files
>
>
>
> Thanks Andrew, this explains all the issues I'm having. :)
>
> The wiki over here, http://wiki.eclipse.org/PDE/Build, states this:
> "Have your .product file based on features, and include your root
> feature. If your root feature does not containg the bin.includes
> property, then it will not be included in the final build results, but
> the root files will be."
> I have seen the same statement in the docs as well...
>
> Looks like this "API" changed with 3.5, the final p2 repository does
> contain the feature now, even though I don't have bin.includes. This
> has some implications, like me having to care about maintaining the
> root features name, license, provider etc. making me prefer the
> original behaviour of just adding the root files to the launcher
> artifacts. I would have expected 3.5 to do something similar, maybe to
> create new artifacts from root files, but not to add the feature to
> the final repo.
>
> Anyway, I'll try the workaround and file a bug for the issue
> :) HTH, Ciao, hh
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: p2-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:p2-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Andrew Niefer
> Sent: Monday, May 25, 2009 11:30 PM
> To: P2 developer discussions
> Subject: RE: [p2-dev] root files
>
>
> The change in root files is by design, however you have found a bug
> about the featureList (and probably also pluginList), where those
> lists aren't getting included in the final product. Can you raise a
> bug for that please.
>
> Build-time features that contribute rootfiles but no feature jar end
> up being purely metadata together with the root artifacts.
>
> Work around would be a p2.inf beside the .product file to add
> requirements on the generated root IUs from those features.
>
> -Andrew
>
>
>
> "Haigermoser, Helmut" <Helmut.Haigermoser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent by: p2-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> 05/25/2009 10:20 AM
> Please respond to
> P2 developer discussions <p2-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> To
> "P2 developer discussions" <p2-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> cc Subject
> RE: [p2-dev] root files
>
>
>
>
>
>
> guys, this issue (if it is one) could be critical, can you confirm
> root files are still working in 3.5, and if so, how?
> TIA,
> Ciao, hh
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: p2-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:p2-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Haigermoser, Helmut
> Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2009 3:46 PM
> To: P2 developer discussions
> Subject: [p2-dev] root files
>
> Ciao Experts :)
> Something seems to have changed since 3.4.1 concerning root files and
> how to get them into a repository.
> In my 3.4-based build I had a feature, included by
> featureList=<feature>, and within that feature I had a line
> root<config>=root.files
>
> This way all files in root.files ended up in the root of my
> installation if I installed the product. Now, this does not seem to
> work anymore.
> Instead of adding the root files to the launcher binary artifact
> separate feature IUs get generated, which is the first problem since
> the feature's only purpose is to provide root files, not to end up at
> the customer site. Also, that IU is never referenced by my product and
> the root file never gets installed :(
>
> With pdebuild now doing the whole metadatageneration right at the time
> the build is happening the whole system is different. Also, I might
> have missed messages/bugs/blogs/twitters that dealt with this problem,
> would you mind enlightening me? :)
>
> TIA,
> Ciao, hh
> _______________________________________________
> p2-dev mailing list
> p2-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/p2-dev
> _______________________________________________
> p2-dev mailing list
> p2-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/p2-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> p2-dev mailing list
> p2-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/p2-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> p2-dev mailing list
> p2-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/p2-dev
>
_______________________________________________
p2-dev mailing list
p2-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/p2-dev
