Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
RE: [p2-dev] Shared installs and our EPP Packages

Please not that the strategy of having two files and trying
to detect a broken, shared .info file seems to be buggy, some time ago
one of my collegues ran into an issue with the
"org.eclipse.equinox.concurrent" plug-in(1) that will render the shared
.info file "broken" and refuse to use whatever you changed in the shared

We could fix this bug and keep the strategy, or should we think about a
different strategy, maybe not having two files and synching them but
having one master and one (user) .info file with just the differences,
be it additions or removals?

Let me know what you think:)
Ciao hh

[1] = shared vs. local issue:

-----Original Message-----
From: p2-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:p2-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Francis Upton
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 7:23 PM
To: P2 developer discussions
Subject: Re: [p2-dev] Shared installs and our EPP Packages

        The logic says: If the shared contains all the
bundles in the local one, then use the local one. That is, if the shared is a subset, then it's ok to use the local --
because the local just contains additional bundles.  However, if somehow
the local one removes bundles (or updates them), then we will likely hit
problems down the road, so revert and use the shared file
-- this is the inconsistency I was talking about.  Since we hit this
inconsistency, we assume the local file is 'wrong' and we
use the shared one -- which of course doesn't have the newly installed

I think at this point a detailed error should be logged in the startup
though because that condition is something the is not supposed to happen
and that would help people diagnose these sorts of problems in the
future. Right now it just does not work and we don't know why. In
general my feeling is that p2 should complain a little more if things
are not right and give a lot of diagnostic information which will help
track down  issues like this in the field.

        Does that make sense?

Yes, thanks for your clear and thoughtful explanation. 

Back to the top