Home » Archived » Buckminster » Ho to replicate IDE RCP Export with Buckminster
|
| Re: Ho to replicate IDE RCP Export with Buckminster [message #388183 is a reply to message #388179] |
Tue, 28 July 2009 08:39   |
|
Tas Frangoullides wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to establish an automated RCP product build using buckminster
> and I'm struggling with the final piece of producing a zip. Looking at
> the Buckminster MailApp tutorial I notice that the equinox launcher is
> included to achieve this which is not what I expected.
>
The equinox launcher that is present in the ant script is used for launching the director application. The director in
turn installs the product into a location. The launcher used for invoking the director will not be part of that product.
Everything in the product stems from the P2 repository that was created in the previous step.
> Also, if I do an
> export from the IDE, I get two launcher EXEs which means I have
> inconsistent results between automated and ide builds.
>
I don't understand. Why do you get two launchers? Are you saying that the IDE export is flawed?
> Is there a way to have buckminster create an RCP product zip which is
> identical to that of the IDE Export?
>
I beleive that the approach in the MailApp tutorial should give you that.
- thomas
|
|
|
| Re: Ho to replicate IDE RCP Export with Buckminster [message #388184 is a reply to message #388183] |
Tue, 28 July 2009 09:17 |
|
Looking closer at what the MailApp demo produces I can see that it is flawed as it stands right now. The
buckminster.properties in the o.e.b.tutorial.mailapp.releng contains this:
# What platforms should be built, * for "all"
target.os=*
target.ws=*
target.arch=*
which is OK (and desirable) for all steps up to the site.p2. The final step however, where the actual application is
built, cannot use these settings. The MailApp must be built for an explicit platform. The P2 director app will not
recognize the '*' when installing.
Could it be that you used different property settings when running from the IDE versus running headless? If I try
building the MailApp using the above settings, I get an app that has no launchers at all.
Regards,
Thomas Hallgren
Thomas Hallgren wrote:
> Tas Frangoullides wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm trying to establish an automated RCP product build using
>> buckminster and I'm struggling with the final piece of producing a
>> zip. Looking at the Buckminster MailApp tutorial I notice that the
>> equinox launcher is included to achieve this which is not what I
>> expected.
> >
> The equinox launcher that is present in the ant script is used for
> launching the director application. The director in turn installs the
> product into a location. The launcher used for invoking the director
> will not be part of that product. Everything in the product stems from
> the P2 repository that was created in the previous step.
>
>> Also, if I do an export from the IDE, I get two launcher EXEs which
>> means I have inconsistent results between automated and ide builds.
>>
> I don't understand. Why do you get two launchers? Are you saying that
> the IDE export is flawed?
>
>> Is there a way to have buckminster create an RCP product zip which is
>> identical to that of the IDE Export?
>>
> I beleive that the approach in the MailApp tutorial should give you that.
>
> - thomas
|
|
|
| Re: Ho to replicate IDE RCP Export with Buckminster [message #388188 is a reply to message #388184] |
Tue, 28 July 2009 10:57 |
 Tas Frangoullides
Messages: 195
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Thomas,
It possible that there are slight differences in my confirugration each time
which produce different results.
I have certainly experienced the lack of a launcher when using the headless
build, thanks for explaining why.
Now, when I say IDE I mean the PDE Product Export Wizard, not Buckminster's
Invoke action. I am comparing these becuase replicating the PDE Product
Export from a headless buckminster is my goal. In particular I want the
launcher name and icon to be customized as described in the product
configuration. I am not achieving this with the MailAppDemo and when I tried
to used to PDE Product Export Wizard on it I got two launchers which
confused me further. I now know there is a bug with the PDE build which
causes it to leave out the launcher if the deltapack is not present and
wondering if this is something I also need to consider when using
buckminster.
I think I should try and start over with the MailApp Tutorial on a fresh
environment and see if I can reproduce the problem.
Thanks,
Tas
"Thomas Hallgren" <thomas@tada.se> wrote in message
news:h4mfo7$dgj$1@build.eclipse.org...
> Looking closer at what the MailApp demo produces I can see that it is
> flawed as it stands right now. The buckminster.properties in the
> o.e.b.tutorial.mailapp.releng contains this:
>
> # What platforms should be built, * for "all"
> target.os=*
> target.ws=*
> target.arch=*
>
> which is OK (and desirable) for all steps up to the site.p2. The final
> step however, where the actual application is built, cannot use these
> settings. The MailApp must be built for an explicit platform. The P2
> director app will not recognize the '*' when installing.
>
> Could it be that you used different property settings when running from
> the IDE versus running headless? If I try building the MailApp using the
> above settings, I get an app that has no launchers at all.
>
> Regards,
> Thomas Hallgren
>
>
>
> Thomas Hallgren wrote:
>> Tas Frangoullides wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I'm trying to establish an automated RCP product build using buckminster
>>> and I'm struggling with the final piece of producing a zip. Looking at
>>> the Buckminster MailApp tutorial I notice that the equinox launcher is
>>> included to achieve this which is not what I expected.
>> >
>> The equinox launcher that is present in the ant script is used for
>> launching the director application. The director in turn installs the
>> product into a location. The launcher used for invoking the director will
>> not be part of that product. Everything in the product stems from the P2
>> repository that was created in the previous step.
>>
>>> Also, if I do an export from the IDE, I get two launcher EXEs which
>>> means I have inconsistent results between automated and ide builds.
>>>
>> I don't understand. Why do you get two launchers? Are you saying that the
>> IDE export is flawed?
>>
>>> Is there a way to have buckminster create an RCP product zip which is
>>> identical to that of the IDE Export?
>>>
>> I beleive that the approach in the MailApp tutorial should give you that.
>>
>> - thomas
|
|
| |
| Re: Ho to replicate IDE RCP Export with Buckminster [message #388382 is a reply to message #388189] |
Tue, 28 July 2009 12:40 |
Tas Frangoullides
Messages: 195
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
OK. So I tried building from a fresh environment and, icon aside, I am still
have very different results. I think the difference is around including the
org.eclipse.equinox.executable in the product. I don't beleive this is
neccesary in a normal PDE build but when using buckminster it seems to be
required. Also, the number of launchers in the resulting product looks
excessive. I didn't expect to see launcher and eclipsec in addition to
mailapp. Why does this happen?
Thanks,
Tas
"Johannes Utzig" <mail@jutzig.de> wrote in message
news:h4mm8j$7it$1@build.eclipse.org...
> Hi Tas,
>
> Tas Frangoullides schrieb:
>
>> Now, when I say IDE I mean the PDE Product Export Wizard, not
>> Buckminster's Invoke action. I am comparing these becuase replicating the
>> PDE Product Export from a headless buckminster is my goal. In particular
>> I want the launcher name and icon to be customized as described in the
>> product configuration.
>
> As for the icon, you should have a look at this bug:
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=280721
>
> I actually have a product build up and running with buckminster that uses
> a customized launcher name and icon, so it definetly is running (when
> keeping the bug in mind).
>
> Best regards,
> Johannes
|
|
|
| Re: Ho to replicate IDE RCP Export with Buckminster [message #388383 is a reply to message #388382] |
Tue, 28 July 2009 13:08 |
|
Hi Tas,
The executable feature contains launchers for all available platforms. That's why its present. The repository that is
created should not be limited to one particular platform. Instead, the selection of which platform to use is made when
using the director to install from that repository. I'm sure the same thing is true for PDE build.
To have the executable feature present is optional if you are happy creating a repository that only supports one
specific platform.
The fact that 'launcher' and/or 'eclipse' is present in additions to 'mailapp' is a bug. From what I can see, we do
instruct P2 to rename the launcher when installing, not to copy it. I need to investigate that further. Only 'mailapp'
should be there.
Regards,
Thomas Hallgren
Tas Frangoullides wrote:
> OK. So I tried building from a fresh environment and, icon aside, I am
> still have very different results. I think the difference is around
> including the org.eclipse.equinox.executable in the product. I don't
> beleive this is neccesary in a normal PDE build but when using
> buckminster it seems to be required. Also, the number of launchers in
> the resulting product looks excessive. I didn't expect to see launcher
> and eclipsec in addition to mailapp. Why does this happen?
>
> Thanks,
> Tas
>
>
> "Johannes Utzig" <mail@jutzig.de> wrote in message
> news:h4mm8j$7it$1@build.eclipse.org...
>> Hi Tas,
>>
>> Tas Frangoullides schrieb:
>>
>>> Now, when I say IDE I mean the PDE Product Export Wizard, not
>>> Buckminster's Invoke action. I am comparing these becuase replicating
>>> the PDE Product Export from a headless buckminster is my goal. In
>>> particular I want the launcher name and icon to be customized as
>>> described in the product configuration.
>>
>> As for the icon, you should have a look at this bug:
>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=280721
>>
>> I actually have a product build up and running with buckminster that
>> uses a customized launcher name and icon, so it definetly is running
>> (when keeping the bug in mind).
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Johannes
>
|
|
|
| Re: Ho to replicate IDE RCP Export with Buckminster [message #388384 is a reply to message #388383] |
Tue, 28 July 2009 13:22 |
Carsten Reckord
Messages: 139
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi all,
On 28.07.2009 15:08, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
> The fact that 'launcher' and/or 'eclipse' is present in additions to 'mailapp' is a bug. From what I can see, we do
> instruct P2 to rename the launcher when installing, not to copy it. I need to investigate that further. Only 'mailapp'
> should be there.
I can't find the article right now, but I read a few days ago that getting both 'launcher' and 'eclipse' is a known bug when including both
the org.eclipse.equinox.executable and the org.eclipse.rcp feature in a feature-based product (whereas only including rcp does not get you
an executable at all).
I would guess the reason for getting both the renamed and the original 'eclipse' is due to some problem between the p2 BrandingIron and
publisher similar to what I encountered for the Mac platform, see
http://www.eclipse.org/newsportal/article.php?id=6608&gr oup=eclipse.technology.equinox#6608. Essentially, the branding does not let the
subsequent packaging step know about its changes. For the Mac, that leads to actual errors, maybe on other platforms it leads to having both
versions of the executable.
|
|
|
| Re: Ho to replicate IDE RCP Export with Buckminster [message #388385 is a reply to message #388384] |
Tue, 28 July 2009 13:57 |
Tas Frangoullides
Messages: 195
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi,
Yes. That's the behaviour I am seeing. Though I don't get this problem when
using the Product Export Wizard or a headless PDE Product Build.
"Carsten Reckord" <creckord@uni-kassel.de> wrote in message
news:h4mu2o$s4d$1@build.eclipse.org...
> Hi all,
>
> On 28.07.2009 15:08, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
>> The fact that 'launcher' and/or 'eclipse' is present in additions to
>> 'mailapp' is a bug. From what I can see, we do instruct P2 to rename the
>> launcher when installing, not to copy it. I need to investigate that
>> further. Only 'mailapp' should be there.
>
> I can't find the article right now, but I read a few days ago that getting
> both 'launcher' and 'eclipse' is a known bug when including both the
> org.eclipse.equinox.executable and the org.eclipse.rcp feature in a
> feature-based product (whereas only including rcp does not get you an
> executable at all).
>
> I would guess the reason for getting both the renamed and the original
> 'eclipse' is due to some problem between the p2 BrandingIron and publisher
> similar to what I encountered for the Mac platform, see
> http://www.eclipse.org/newsportal/article.php?id=6608&gr oup=eclipse.technology.equinox#6608.
> Essentially, the branding does not let the subsequent packaging step know
> about its changes. For the Mac, that leads to actual errors, maybe on
> other platforms it leads to having both versions of the executable.
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu Apr 25 04:18:09 GMT 2024
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 5.03374 seconds |
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
