[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [equinox-dev] [p2] Relocatability

The intent displayed in 200228 is fine. I made a left hand turn somewhere. When I look at bundles.txt for the admin demo it has relative paths but when I look at bundles.txt that was generated for an install that I did it has absolute paths. What do I have to change in my properties when installing to make this work correctly? I was running a standalone director application and don't have the benefit of Susan's UI.

Inactive hide details for Pascal Rapicault <Pascal_Rapicault@xxxxxxxxxx>Pascal Rapicault <Pascal_Rapicault@xxxxxxxxxx>

          Pascal Rapicault <Pascal_Rapicault@xxxxxxxxxx>
          Sent by: equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

          10/05/2007 12:49 PM

          Please respond to
          Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>


Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>


equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx, equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx


Re: [equinox-dev] [p2] Relocatability

This is incorrect. The resolution of
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=204041 and
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=200228 has been done to allow
for installations to be moved. However like in the past, this will only be
doable under certain constraints, one of which being to locate the bundle
pool under the eclipse folder (at least with the current design).

Also, as eclipse grows with having more dependencies on non bundle things
(and other things depends on eclipse), I think that moving an eclipse
instance will become more and more brittle, and reconciliation may just be
a safer path.


equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 10/05/2007 12:16:00 PM:

> It would seem based on the latest resolved bug https://
> bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=204041 that there is no plan
> to make the install and workspace images relocatable. This would be
> a regression from previous update. With the previous update all
> features were referenced in the platform.xml relative to platform://
> base. We also had platform://configuration. These locations were
> resolved at runtime so it was possible to use a mounted image. If
> the workspace and user sites were relative to the configuration it
> was also possible to have a mounted workspace. For p2 we seem to be
> using absolute paths. Do I need to open a bug or is this work
> scheduled? We have use cases that require the ability to mount the
> user workspace and the install image. We are currently doing this on
> eclipse 3.2 with a few restrictions.
> _______________________________________________
> equinox-dev mailing list
> equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx

equinox-dev mailing list

GIF image

GIF image

GIF image