RE: [p2-dev] updating a profile

["Haigermoser, Helmut" <Helmut.Haigermoser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ciao Simon :)
Ah, that's the problem then, I was not aware of a special treatment of
IUs that only get installed for satisfaction of others,
my test case installs all IUs of a Repo, changing that to installing
only group-Ius made things work even without introducing the singleton
flag! :)

 I'm still interested in that flag as we seem to be able to make a
fundamental statement like "we only support a single version of an IU in
our profile" using it...

Thanks for all the help guys,
Ciao, hh

-----Original Message-----
From: p2-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:p2-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Simon Kaegi
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 9:33 PM
To: P2 developer discussions
Subject: RE: [p2-dev] updating a profile

That 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