| Feature dependency [message #323940] |
Mon, 14 January 2008 05:25  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Hi,
I've created feature project and set its dependencies to one other
feature in my
projects set.
So edited feature called B depends on feature A.
Both of them have version number 1.1.0.qualifier. Dependency on A has
set that
it depends on version 1.1.0.qualifier "greater of equal".
My problem is that when I change version of A to 1.1.1.qualifier feature
B shows an
error icon in PDE editor of feature.xml (dependencies page).
Is there something wrong?
--
Piotr
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Feature dependency [message #324254 is a reply to message #324224] |
Mon, 21 January 2008 11:33  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: mark_melvin.amis.com
On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 02:27:20 -0500, Piotr Górny <airform@o2.pl> wrote:
> Mark Melvin pisze:
>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:28:12 -0500, Piotr Górny <airform@o2.pl> wrote:
>>
> [cut]
>> I think I've lost context of the original problem here. Are you
>> talking about an error in the feature.xml editor in your workspace?
>> I'm not sure this is entirely unexpected unless you are feature-based
>> self-hosting. Have you tried exporting the features and plugins and
>> testing your update site that way?
>> Mark.
>
> My build is feature-based and I've got a few groups of plugins which I
> packed
> into features. Then I export product constructed of features.
>
> Some features depends on others, so I've defined that. But on
> "Dependecies"
> page of feature.xml editor I see error when I change version of one of
> features
> even if I have "Greater of equal" option enabled...
Sorry. I just checked my feature definitions and they also have errors in
my feature.xml editor. I don't think this really matters if you are using
the ".qualifier" mechanism because you are never going to have the correct
version in your workspace as this bit gets substituted at build time.
Have you tried your RCP app since removing the ".qualifier" from the end?
I think it should all work fine in a built and deployed app and you can
safely ignore the error markers in the editor in your workspace in this
case.
For reference, my feature dependencies look like this:
<requires>
<import feature="my.feature" version="2.2.0" match="compatible"/>
<import feature="org.eclipse.platform" version="3.3.0"
match="compatible"/>
</requires>
And I have an error marker on both of these items in the feature.xml.
There is an error marker on "org.eclipse.platform" because it isn't in my
workspace. The feature "my.feature" *is* in my workspace, but there is
still an error marker on it, and after thinking about this I agree that
there should not be an error marker there. I *do* have a compatible
version of the plugin in my workspace. It seems to me that the PDE is
doing something wrong here and a bug should be filed (if there isn't one
there already) as "2.2.0" should be compatible with "2.y.z.anything".
In any case - it all works as expected if I export this and run an update.
Your *original* problem was due to the fact that you included ".qualifier"
in your dependency requirement. You basically were requiring that the
installed pre-requisite feature had a version of *at least*
1.1.0.qualifier (the "qualifier" does not get replaced in the feature
dependency when you build), and you had installed version
1.1.0.200801141150, which is less than "1.1.0.qualifier" (200801141150 <
"qualifier" when matching feature versions).
Try exporting to your RCP app without the qualifier in the dependency
declaration as I suggested and see if it works as you expect.
Mark.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Feature dependency [message #324365 is a reply to message #324362] |
Wed, 23 January 2008 10:18 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: mark_melvin.amis.com
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 10:03:45 -0500, Piotr Górny <airform@o2.pl> wrote:
> Mark Melvin pisze:
>> On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 02:27:20 -0500, Piotr Górny <airform@o2.pl> wrote:
>>
> [cut]
>
> Hi Mark,
> you're absolutely right - update site works when I get rid of qualifier
> suffix.
> Thanks a lot for your help.
>
> --
> Piotr
No problem! Glad it worked for you.
M.
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.32007 seconds
Home