| 3.4 installation as a target platform [message #38112] |
Thu, 18 December 2008 23:06  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: eclipse-news.rizzoweb.com
My team is in the habit of checking in our target platform into CVS so
that we are all building against a known platform.
I've always just taken an Eclipse EPP package, unzipped it, added the
other required features and plugins, and then checked that in. This
worked well while we were building against Europa.
But it seems that p2 complicates things a bit. I've noticed that there
seems to be machine-specific stuff (ie, absolute paths) in the
configuration/ and p2/ directories of the target platform, especially
after I run it to pick up something new I've added (or removed) from the
dropins/ directory.
So my question is, what should be excluded from check-in when a Ganymede
installation is used as the target platform?
TIA,
Eric
|
|
|
|
| Re: 3.4 installation as a target platform [message #38176 is a reply to message #38145] |
Fri, 19 December 2008 15:04  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: eclipse-news.rizzoweb.com
On 12/18/2008 7:46 PM, Chris Aniszczyk wrote:
> Eric Rizzo wrote:
>> My team is in the habit of checking in our target platform into CVS so
>> that we are all building against a known platform.
>> I've always just taken an Eclipse EPP package, unzipped it, added the
>> other required features and plugins, and then checked that in. This
>> worked well while we were building against Europa.
>>
>> But it seems that p2 complicates things a bit. I've noticed that there
>> seems to be machine-specific stuff (ie, absolute paths) in the
>> configuration/ and p2/ directories of the target platform, especially
>> after I run it to pick up something new I've added (or removed) from
>> the dropins/ directory.
>>
>> So my question is, what should be excluded from check-in when a
>> Ganymede installation is used as the target platform?
>
> There has been a lot of bugs around path issues that were resolved
> recently as of 3.5M4... I know that's not the greatest thing to say but
> is updating an option for you?
>
> I would ask this question on the Equinox newsgroup where the p2 team
> lingers.
No, going to 3.5 is not an option right now. I've only recently
convinced the team to go to 3.4 because our product is now being based
on it :-(
I've copied the equinox group to this thread, so hopefully the p2 team
can provided some insight.
Thanks,
Eric
|
|
|
|
| Re: 3.4 installation as a target platform [message #38240 is a reply to message #38209] |
Fri, 19 December 2008 18:42 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: eclipse-news.rizzoweb.com
On 12/19/2008 12:47 PM, Scott wrote:
> I could be wrong but I think most of the path issues are fixed in 3.4.1.
> I just checked my config.ini to make sure but I do not see any
> absolute paths. 3.4.1 is released so it should be less risk for you're
> team.
>
I am using 3.4.1
The absolute paths appear to be confined mostly to these directories,
which I'm assuming are OK to leave out of the target platform when I
check it in; I'm really looking for confirmation that it will not come
up to bite me in the future, or if there is any other stuff that can
safely be removed from the installation and still have it work as a
target platform.
configuration\org.eclipse.osgi\
p2\org.eclipse.equinox.p2.director\
p2\org.eclipse.equinox.p2.engine\profileRegistry\PlatformPro file.profile\
Eric
|
|
|
| [bump] [p2] Re: 3.4 installation as a target platform [message #38574 is a reply to message #38240] |
Tue, 23 December 2008 20:20 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: eclipse-news.rizzoweb.com
On 12/19/2008 1:42 PM, Eric Rizzo wrote:
> On 12/19/2008 12:47 PM, Scott wrote:
>> I could be wrong but I think most of the path issues are fixed in 3.4.1.
>> I just checked my config.ini to make sure but I do not see any
>> absolute paths. 3.4.1 is released so it should be less risk for you're
>> team.
>>
>
> I am using 3.4.1
> The absolute paths appear to be confined mostly to these directories,
> which I'm assuming are OK to leave out of the target platform when I
> check it in; I'm really looking for confirmation that it will not come
> up to bite me in the future, or if there is any other stuff that can
> safely be removed from the installation and still have it work as a
> target platform.
>
> configuration\org.eclipse.osgi\
> p2\org.eclipse.equinox.p2.director\
> p2\org.eclipse.equinox.p2.engine\profileRegistry\PlatformPro file.profile\
It appears this does not work. If the PlatformProfile.profile directory
is missing, p2 fails miserably with no indication to the user. You click
Software Updates... from the menu and it just does nothing. There are
NPEs in the error log, but nothing in terms of user feedback.
The worst part of all this is that it seems it is impossible now to use
a 3.4 installation checked in to source control as a target platform for
a team to share! That was a good use case in 3.2 and 3.3; now I can't
figure out how to reach the goal of a shared target platform.
Is there any option at this point (3.5 is not an option)? The storage of
and reliance on absolute paths looks to be a showstopper here...
Anyone from the p2 or PDE teams...?
Eric
|
|
|
|
| Re: 3.4 installation as a target platform [message #587391 is a reply to message #38145] |
Fri, 19 December 2008 15:04 |
 Eric Rizzo
Messages: 3070
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
On 12/18/2008 7:46 PM, Chris Aniszczyk wrote:
> Eric Rizzo wrote:
>> My team is in the habit of checking in our target platform into CVS so
>> that we are all building against a known platform.
>> I've always just taken an Eclipse EPP package, unzipped it, added the
>> other required features and plugins, and then checked that in. This
>> worked well while we were building against Europa.
>>
>> But it seems that p2 complicates things a bit. I've noticed that there
>> seems to be machine-specific stuff (ie, absolute paths) in the
>> configuration/ and p2/ directories of the target platform, especially
>> after I run it to pick up something new I've added (or removed) from
>> the dropins/ directory.
>>
>> So my question is, what should be excluded from check-in when a
>> Ganymede installation is used as the target platform?
>
> There has been a lot of bugs around path issues that were resolved
> recently as of 3.5M4... I know that's not the greatest thing to say but
> is updating an option for you?
>
> I would ask this question on the Equinox newsgroup where the p2 team
> lingers.
No, going to 3.5 is not an option right now. I've only recently
convinced the team to go to 3.4 because our product is now being based
on it :-(
I've copied the equinox group to this thread, so hopefully the p2 team
can provided some insight.
Thanks,
Eric
|
|
|
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.04950 seconds
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
