| RE: [p2-dev] updating a profile |
From: p2-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:p2-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Simon Kaegi
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 3:33 PM
To: P2 developer discussions
Subject: RE: [p2-dev] updating a profileThat sounds strange.
Even if B 1.0.0 and C 1.0.0 are not singletons they should get uninstalled along with A 1.0.0 so long as they were not explicitly installed (e.g. they were only installed to satisfy A 1.0.0's reuqirements).
The planner will remove all IUs that are not satisfying a depenency in the tree of explicitly installed IUs.
Is it possible that B and C were explicitly installed or that they are satisfying the dependencies of another IU in the installation?
-Simon
p2-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 08/05/2008 03:08:49 PM:
> [image removed]
>
> RE: [p2-dev] updating a profile
>
> Schaefer, Doug
>
> to:
>
> P2 developer discussions
>
> 08/05/2008 03:10 PM
>
> Sent by:
>
> p2-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Please respond to P2 developer discussions
>
> I think that's it. Our IUs are not singletons and they probably
> should. We'll give it another try and report back. Thanks Susan!
>
> Cheers
> Doug (the Wind River night shift - Helmut's in Austria enjoying the
> evening right now :)
>
>
> From: p2-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:p2-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Susan Franklin McCourt
> Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 3:00 PM
> To: P2 developer discussions
> Cc: p2-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx; p2-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [p2-dev] updating a profile
> Helmut, I'm assuming you had a typo and meant to say
>
> Group A 1.0.1 -> IU B 1.0.1
> Group A 1.0.1 -> IU C 1.0.1 <not B>
>
> It sounds like you are setting up the profile change request as
> expected (similarly to what the UI does in the update wizard).
>
> Can you clarify what you mean when you say that IU B 1.0.0 and IU C
> 1.0.0 are not uninstalled. Are you referring to the profile's view
> of the world or what's on disk?
> If you execute a query on the profile for all IU's, do you see them
> in the list?
>
> I think that whether IU B 1.0.0 and IU C 1.0.0 should be uninstalled
> depends on whether the IU is a singleton -
> IInstallableUnit.setSingleton(boolean).
> If it is not a singleton, then I'm not sure that the director/
> planner is that aggressive in removing the older versions simply
> because the newer version was brought in by an update. (Pascal could
> say for sure - he is on vacation right now).
>
> If B and C are singletons, then it sounds like a bug that the IU's
> are not uninstalled.
> If they are not singletons, then I think you would have to
> explicitly tell the planner to remove those IU's.
>
> susan
>
>
> [image removed] "Haigermoser, Helmut" <Helmut.Haigermoser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> [image removed]
>
> [image removed]
> "Haigermoser, Helmut" <Helmut.Haigermoser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent by: p2-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> 08/05/2008 09:32 AM
> Please respond to P2 developer discussions
>
> [image removed]
>
> To: <p2-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> cc:
> Subject: [p2-dev] updating a profile
>
>
>
> Ciao Guys :)
> I'm having a little difficulty understanding updates to a profile, can
> you please solve this mystery for me?
>
> Here is my simple IU - structure:
> Group A 1.0.0 -> IU B 1.0.0
> Group A 1.0.0 -> IU C 1.0.0
>
> Here is the available updates:
> Group A 1.0.1 -> IU B 1.0.1
> Group A 1.0.1 -> IU B 1.0.1
>
> Here is what I'm doing:
> 1.) Run the UpdateChecker and wait for a notification
> 2.) Based on the UpdateEvent, create a ProfileChangeRequest:
> Add "Group A 1.0.1" to the "IUsToAdd" array of the request
> Add "Group A 1.0.0" to the "IUsToRemove" array of the request
> Note that I don't add the dependent IUs here, only the group
> 3.) Calculate a provisioning plan and execute it.
>
> Now, here is what happens:
> Group A 1.0.1 gets installed
> IU A 1.0.1 gets installed
> IU B 1.0.1 gets installed
> Group A 1.0.0 gets uninstalled
>
> You see? The problem is The IUs A and B, their original versions 1.0.0
> remain installed, even after a garbagecollector.runGC(IProfile), so it
> looks like the dependencies are correctly resolved for the install phase
> but not for the uninstall phase. There is still the chance of me having
> a bug in my own code, but could you try and explain the issue, maybe I'm
> using something in a terribly wrong way...
> 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