Some Eclipse Foundation services are deprecated, or will be soon. Please ensure you've read this important communication.

Bug 331101

Summary:	Support the Virgo Kernel as a runtime environment in the Virgo tooling
Product:	[RT] Virgo	Reporter:	Glyn Normington <glyn.normington>
Component:	tooling	Assignee:	Miles Parker <milesparker>
Status:	RESOLVED FIXED	QA Contact:
Severity:	enhancement
Priority:	P3	CC:	david_williams, eclipse, k2eric, milesparker, mlippert
Version:	2.1.0.RELEASE
Target Milestone:	---
Hardware:	PC
OS:	Mac OS X - Carbon (unsup.)
Whiteboard:
Bug Depends on:	373453
Bug Blocks:	368783

Description Glyn Normington

2010-11-25 04:46:25 EST

When creating a new server runtime environment, the only option for Virgo is a Virgo Web Server. The Virgo Kernel also needs to be supported.

Note that there is a simple hack to work around this, although some users will find this distasteful. If you create a new Virgo Web Server server runtime environment and point at a Virgo kernel installation, the error:

".version file in lib directory is missing key 'virgo.server.version'. Make sure to point to a Virgo Server installation."

is displayed. Edit this file to contain the key 'virgo.server.version' instead of the key 'virgo.kernel.version' and then the runtime environment can be set up and works pretty well.

Comment 1 Glyn Normington

2012-03-01 04:23:41 EST

Assigning to tooling.

Comment 2 Glyn Normington

2012-03-01 04:28:38 EST

Please note this should be trivial to implement and will formally open up the tooling to a broader set of Virgo applications.

Comment 3 Miles Parker

2012-03-01 12:18:15 EST

See for context bug 372893. Should we call this "Virgo Kernel", or "Virgo Runtime"? My preference is for the latter.

Comment 4 Glyn Normington

2012-03-02 04:34:28 EST

Virgo Runtime gives us more room for manoeuvre since there are also the Virgo Nano packages these days.

Comment 5 Miles Parker

2012-03-06 16:15:19 EST

After looking at the current setup more, I think we should call this Kernel or something. "Runtime" is just too overloaded when it comes to the support through Web Tools.

Is the change above the *only* change that would be needed to support the runtime? e.g. changing any command-line and other configuration referrnces from "virgo.server.version" to "virgo.kernel.version"?

Comment 6 Glyn Normington

2012-03-07 04:23:15 EST

(In reply to comment #5)
> After looking at the current setup more, I think we should call this Kernel or
> something. "Runtime" is just too overloaded when it comes to the support
> through Web Tools.
> 
> Is the change above the *only* change that would be needed to support the
> runtime? e.g. changing any command-line and other configuration referrnces from
> "virgo.server.version" to "virgo.kernel.version"?

I've certainly been able to use the tooling in the past by just hacking the version so it looks right to the tooling, so hopefully yes. Of course, there may be subtleties like people trying to deploy web apps to the kernel and wondering why they don't work, but hopefully that will be obvious to users (?!).

Comment 7 Miles Parker

2012-03-07 22:39:41 EST

See bug 373453; this is now handled transparently, and the user simply needs to point server to a valid runtime environment.

Note that I haven't tested how well the tools actually work beyond trivially starting the server. So there may be kernel specific stuff we have to deal with. But we should handle any of that under a separate bug.