|
| Re: [buckminster-dev] Does it matter to "Buckminster" which VM is used for &qu [message #1690764 is a reply to message #1690746] |
Tue, 31 March 2015 06:55  |
|
Hi David,
It's correct that Buckminster does it's own pack and repack instead of using an external executable but we still execute
the same underlying code. I.e. running Buckminster with Java 6 or Java 7 will make a difference. Buckminster's pack
logic isn't mandatory though. It must be enabled by passing the property site.pack200=true to the build.
Buckminster will recognize the eclipse.inf and the jarprocessor.exclude.pack directive. See the following link for a
full list of options that the jarprocessor will recognize:
http://git.eclipse.org/c/buckminster/buckminster.git/tree/org.eclipse.buckminster.jarprocessor/src/org/eclipse/buckminster/jarprocessor/JarInfo.java
- thomas
On 2015-03-31 04:07, David M Williams wrote:
> Buckminster team, can one of you comment on
>
> *_Bug 463510_* <https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=463510>- Should we use Java 7 in the infrastructure
> signing service? (Is currently Java 6).
>
> If I recall, Buckminster does it's own "repack" and "pack" so perhaps it does not matter much which VM is used for
> central signing service ... that is, do you always specify "-nopack" to central service? Or, only for things like
> "features" and "source bundles" but otherwise do you let the central service do the "repack"?
>
> Also, do you recognize "eclipse.inf" options in a bundle? That is, do you recognize
> jarprocessor.exclude.pack =true
> and skip (re) packing that bundle?
>
> I'm trying to help those that have trouble getting pack200 to "work right" and therefore turn it off for all their bundles.
>
> Thanks for any comments and confirmation.
>
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.01928 seconds
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
