Re: [cbi-dev] Question about the new jarsigner plugin - signing & packin

[Markus Tiede <Markus.Tiede@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks - I just missed the last plugin "tycho-p2-plugin" - now all 
artifacts get packed and included correctly.

And as mentioned before: do we have to do anything else to produce valid 
p2 consumable artifacts apart from waiting until tomorrow due to issue 
387557 and 388629?

With best regards,
MarkusT

On 03.09.2012 14:49, Igor Fedorenko wrote:
> Not sure, to be honest, inclusion of packed artifacts is supposed to
> "just work" for repositories.
>
> There is very small/standalone example project that shows tycho
> sign&pack support in action [1]. See if you can find a different from
> your setup. You can also use m2e as an example, but it's little more
> convoluted.
>
> [1] /shared/technology/m2e/bug387557
>
> --
> Regards,
> Igor
>
>
>
> On 12-09-03 8:36 AM, Markus Tiede wrote:
> > Thank you for the quick response - including the packed artifacts does
> > work now for those which get retrieved from a target definition but we
> > are still missing the packed versions of our own artifacts in the
> > created p2-repository. Is there anything else to configure to include
> > those? And do we have to do anything else to produce valid p2 consumable
> > artifacts apart from waiting until tomorrow?
> >
> > And indeed: the new signing / packing mechanism is dramatically faster
> > than the previous one - thanks for providing!
> >
> > With best regards,
> > MarkusT
> >
> > On 03.09.2012 13:21, Igor Fedorenko wrote:
> > > You need includePackedArtifacts=true target platform configuration
> > > parameter, see m2e eclipse-sign profile [1] for example how to set 
> > > this.
> > >
> > > Also, beware that up until very recently, tomorrow to be precise,
> > > tycho-built pack200 bundles were not consumable by p2 due to (p2) bug
> > > 387557. As a workaround, I removed eclipse.inf support from tycho, so
> > > if any of your projects use that file for whatever reason, you'd 
> > > need to
> > > remove it from sources to be able to use tycho pack200 support [3].
> > >
> > > Some fun/unscientific observation. It takes about 5 minutes to build,
> > > pack and sign m2e using the new jarsigner plugin. It was taking 
> > > about 15
> > > minutes to just sign m2e repo using the old plugin, and the build time
> > > was extra.
> > >
> > > [1] https://git.eclipse.org/c/m2e/m2e-core.git/tree/pom.xml#n226
> > > [2] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=387557
> > > [3] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=388629
> > >
> > > --
> > > Regards,
> > > Igor
> > >
> > > On 12-09-03 5:21 AM, Markus Tiede wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > The Jubula team has just recently switched to the new jarsigner plugin
> > > > as described here [1] due to the issues described here [2]. We were 
> > > > then
> > > > able to successfully participate in Juno SR1 RC1 (with signed
> > > > artifacts).
> > > >
> > > > We've now noticed that our p2-repo does no longer contain any 
> > > > *.pack.gz
> > > > files for all of our artifacts. Is this supposed to work with the new
> > > > version of the jarsigner plugin?
> > > >
> > > > We've added the corresponding configuration to our main releng pom [3]
> > > > but our p2-repository [4] only contains signed and no packed 
> > > > artifacts.
> > > > Are we missing something here?
> > > >
> > > > AFAIK the major change in the new jarsigner plugin is the individual
> > > > signing / packing of each artifact instead of finally performing those
> > > > steps e.g. on the p2-repository itself. I can confirm that each single
> > > > artifact (bundle, feature) does get signed *and* packed in its
> > > > individual "target/"-directory but somehow those packed artifacts does
> > > > not get included in the p2-repo itself. Could you provide some more
> > > > information how to achieve this?
> > > >
> > > > With best regards,
> > > > MarkusT
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> > > > http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/cross-project-issues-dev/msg08042.html 
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [2]
> > > > http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/cross-project-issues-dev/msg07976.html 
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [3]
> > > > http://git.eclipse.org/c/jubula/org.eclipse.jubula.core.git/tree/org.eclipse.jubula.releng/pom.xml?h=1.2#n18 
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [4]
> > > > http://git.eclipse.org/c/jubula/org.eclipse.jubula.core.git/tree/org.eclipse.jubula.site/pom.xml?h=1.2 
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > cbi-dev mailing list
> > > > cbi-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cbi-dev
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > cbi-dev mailing list
> > > cbi-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cbi-dev
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cbi-dev mailing list
> > cbi-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cbi-dev
> _______________________________________________
> cbi-dev mailing list
> cbi-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cbi-dev