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

[Igor Fedorenko <igor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Everything should be working already, no need to wait.
-- 
Sent from my SGS

Markus Tiede <Markus.Tiede@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>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
>
>_______________________________________________
>cbi-dev mailing list
>cbi-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cbi-dev