14.09.2009 13:04, Thomas Hallgren kirjutas:

You would execute two commands.

buckminster importtargetdefinition my-platform.target
buckminster import my.mspec OR my.cquery

Am I right to assume that these commands are available for headless
build (I can "materialize" the target platform easily enough from the
target definition from Eclipse UI, so my first impulse to ask how do I
do it from Eclipse IDE is moot)

Other than that - if I want to execute some Buckminster commands from
Eclipse UI, I can do that only from within a component?

Alternatively, you right click on an MSPEC or CQUERY file, choose Buckminster and then Import.

The 'importtargetdefinition' command is essentially doing the same thing as the PDE preference settings.

A 'build' is a normal workspace build.

A 'perform' is the same as right-clicking on a project, choose 'Buckminster' -> 'Invoke Action'

etc.

This setup will might require some redundant information though, since
what you require for your TP can be derived from the features that you
materialize.

Regards,
Thomas Hallgren

I would guess, that in the case of workspace materialization, this is
quite okay, as in the development scenario I might need access to much
wider set of target platform plug-ins to be easily able to add new
dependencies on stuff I had before.

Another use case I see this might be useful for is that when I have a
target platform that is composed of multiple features (RCP + ECF + EMF
for example) - then I could import the entire target platform and then
in the second step, use the newly imported target platform as one of the
workspace/product materialization sources...

Does it make sanse? Can aI use it this way?

Regards,
Thomas Hallgren

You would execute two commands.

buckminster importtargetdefinition my-platform.target
buckminster import my.mspec OR my.cquery

This setup will might require some redundant information though, since
what you require for your TP can be derived from the features that you
materialize.

Regards,
Thomas Hallgren

Does it make sanse? Can aI use it this way?

--
Roland Tepp

- thomas

On 09/14/2009 11:33 AM, Roland Tepp wrote:

Thanks for quick reply.

So to get more concrete, let's say I have specified my target platform
in my-platform.target definition and I want to materialize a set of
products in my workspace against the specified target platform.

That is - I want to set the target platform of my workspace to the one
defined in my-platform.target and materialize the workspace based on
some mspec/cquery.

What are the steps I would have to perform to achieve that in headless
mode (e.g. perform one-click set-up of the workspace)?

You would execute two commands.

buckminster importtargetdefinition my-platform.target
buckminster import my.mspec OR my.cquery

This setup will might require some redundant information though, since
what you require for your TP can be derived from the features that you
materialize.

Regards,
Thomas Hallgren

14.09.2009 11:17, Thomas Hallgren kirjutas:

Hi Roland,
The Buckminster command 'importtargetdefinition' will import an eclipse
target definition. The "materialization" as such, is performed the same
way as when you set a target definition from your IDE preferences.

A true Buckminster materialization can also be used to build a target
platform. That has the advantage that you don't need to specify the
features and bundles that should be included. Buckminster figures that
out by resolving the query. You cannot use an eclipse target definition
as input to this process. Instead, you would set the target platform to
point to an empty directory and use an MSPEC to control which components
that should end up there during materialization. The repositories that
you'd use for input must be defined in an RMAP.

Regards,
Thomas Hallgren

On 09/14/2009 10:00 AM, Roland Tepp wrote:

Hey,

Is this possible? how woulod I go about doing this?

Thanks for quick reply.

So to get more concrete, let's say I have specified my target platform
in my-platform.target definition and I want to materialize a set of
products in my workspace against the specified target platform.

That is - I want to set the target platform of my workspace to the one
defined in my-platform.target and materialize the workspace based on
some mspec/cquery.

What are the steps I would have to perform to achieve that in headless
mode (e.g. perform one-click set-up of the workspace)?

You would execute two commands.

buckminster importtargetdefinition my-platform.target
buckminster import my.mspec OR my.cquery

Regards,
Thomas Hallgren

14.09.2009 11:17, Thomas Hallgren kirjutas:

Hi Roland,
The Buckminster command 'importtargetdefinition' will import an eclipse
target definition. The "materialization" as such, is performed the same
way as when you set a target definition from your IDE preferences.

A true Buckminster materialization can also be used to build a target
platform. That has the advantage that you don't need to specify the
features and bundles that should be included. Buckminster figures that
out by resolving the query. You cannot use an eclipse target definition
as input to this process. Instead, you would set the target platform to
point to an empty directory and use an MSPEC to control which components
that should end up there during materialization. The repositories that
you'd use for input must be defined in an RMAP.

Regards,
Thomas Hallgren

On 09/14/2009 10:00 AM, Roland Tepp wrote:

Hey,

Is this possible? how woulod I go about doing this?

Hi Roland,
The Buckminster command 'importtargetdefinition' will import an eclipse
target definition. The "materialization" as such, is performed the same
way as when you set a target definition from your IDE preferences.

A true Buckminster materialization can also be used to build a target
platform. That has the advantage that you don't need to specify the
features and bundles that should be included. Buckminster figures that
out by resolving the query. You cannot use an eclipse target definition
as input to this process. Instead, you would set the target platform to
point to an empty directory and use an MSPEC to control which components
that should end up there during materialization. The repositories that
you'd use for input must be defined in an RMAP.

Regards,
Thomas Hallgren

On 09/14/2009 10:00 AM, Roland Tepp wrote:

Hey,

Is this possible? how woulod I go about doing this?

--
Roland Tepp

Regards,
Thomas Hallgren

Hey,

Is this possible? how woulod I go about doing this?

Is this possible? how woulod I go about doing this?

--
Roland Tepp

Other than that issue - we are having a great experience - now have some Buckminster headless commands working to deploy and run our generators.

Steve

Regards,
Thomas Hallgren

Hi,

I have been trying to get a headless version of Buckminster up and
running with a headless version of Tigerstripe and have run into some
bundle versioning issues.

If I use the headless commands from a 'full' copy of Eclipse with
Subversive and Tigerstripe installed, I get UI errors from Subversive
(which is I think why you have the headless SVN support).

Alternatively, if I get the headless version of Buckminster and try to
install all the necessary dependencies for Tigerstripe (in GMF etc). I
get the following error:

INFO: install 'http://download.eclipse.org/releases/galileo'
'org.eclipse.uml2'
INFO: install 'http://download.eclipse.org/releases/galileo'
'org.eclipse.emf.ocl'
INFO: install 'http://download.eclipse.org/releases/galileo'
'org.eclipse.gmf'
Cannot complete the install because of a conflicting dependency.
[0]Software being installed: Graphical Modeling Framework Runtime
1.1.1.v20090114-0940-7d8B0FXwnKwGb15VuKFF0ELpPk0b
(org.eclipse.gmf.feature.group
1.1.1.v20090114-0940-7d8B0FXwnKwGb15VuKFF0ELpPk0b)
[0]Software currently installed: Buckminster 1.1.350.r10546
(org.eclipse.buckminster.cmdline.product 1.1.350.r10546)
[0]Only one of the following can be installed at once: [0.2]OSGi System
Bundle 3.5.1.R35x_v20090817 (org.eclipse.osgi 3.5.1.R35x_v20090817)
[0.2]OSGi System Bundle 3.5.0.v20090520 (org.eclipse.osgi 3.5.0.v20090520)
[0]Cannot satisfy dependency:
[0.2]From: Buckminster 1.1.350.r10546
(org.eclipse.buckminster.cmdline.product 1.1.350.r10546)
[0.2]To: org.eclipse.osgi [3.5.1.R35x_v20090817]
[0]Cannot satisfy dependency:
[0.2]From: Graphical Modeling Framework Runtime
1.1.1.v20090114-0940-7d8B0FXwnKwGb15VuKFF0ELpPk0b
(org.eclipse.gmf.feature.group
1.1.1.v20090114-0940-7d8B0FXwnKwGb15VuKFF0ELpPk0b)
[0.2]To: org.eclipse.platform.feature.group [3.3.0,4.0.0)
[0]Cannot satisfy dependency:
[0.2]From: Eclipse Platform
3.5.0.v20090611a-9gEeG1HFtQcmRThO4O3aR_fqSMvJR2sJ
(org.eclipse.platform.feature.group
3.5.0.v20090611a-9gEeG1HFtQcmRThO4O3aR_fqSMvJR2sJ)
[0.2]To: org.eclipse.rcp.feature.group
[3.5.0.v20090519-9SA0FwxFv6x089WEf-TWh11]
[0]Cannot satisfy dependency:
[0.2]From: Eclipse RCP 3.5.0.v20090519-9SA0FwxFv6x089WEf-TWh11
(org.eclipse.rcp.feature.group 3.5.0.v20090519-9SA0FwxFv6x089WEf-TWh11)
[0.2]To: org.eclipse.osgi [3.5.0.v20090520]

Not the OSGI system bundle conflict.

Do you have any suggestions as to how I could work around this? Do you
think I am better using the full version (in which case do you have a
suggestion as to how to avoid the Subversive UI errors) or using the
Headless version.

Thanks
Steve
PS: Attached the headless script I used.

I have been trying to get a headless version of Buckminster up and running with a headless version of Tigerstripe and have run into some bundle versioning issues.

If I use the headless commands from a 'full' copy of Eclipse with Subversive and Tigerstripe installed, I get UI errors from Subversive (which is I think why you have the headless SVN support).

Alternatively, if I get the headless version of Buckminster and try to install all the necessary dependencies for Tigerstripe (in GMF etc). I get the following error:

Not the OSGI system bundle conflict.

Do you have any suggestions as to how I could work around this? Do you think I am better using the full version (in which case do you have a suggestion as to how to avoid the Subversive UI errors) or using the Headless version.

Thanks
Steve
PS: Attached the headless script I used.