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

Bug 364979

Summary: Build process for Pre-built help indexes is not reproducable
Product: [Eclipse Project] Platform Reporter: Martin Oberhuber <mober.at+eclipse>
Component: User AssistanceAssignee: platform-ua-inbox <platform-ua-inbox>
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX QA Contact:
Severity: normal    
Priority: P3 CC: daniel_megert, helmut.haigermoser, pwebster, rupert.gratz
Version: 3.7.1   
Target Milestone: ---   
Hardware: PC   
OS: Linux-GTK   
Whiteboard: stalebug
Bug Depends on:    
Bug Blocks: 364980    

Description Martin Oberhuber CLA 2011-11-28 12:33:47 EST
Build ID: Eclipse 3.7.1 / Lucene 2.9.1

The build process for generating a pre-built help index is not reproducable.

This is a problem for software delivery, since deployed binary plugins with identical version (and identical source content) may have different binary content - thus jeopardizing trust in the software delivery mechanism.

For example, comparing the user docs of Eclipse 3.7.0 and Eclipse 3.7.1:
  plugins/org.eclipse.platform.doc.user_3.7.0.v20110601-0800.jar
shows following 4 differences under the index/ folder:

1.) Following files have a timestamp embedded, so re-building changes them:
    - indexed_contributions
    - indexed_dependencies
    - indexed_docs

2.) The binary Lucene segments file differs in bytes 9-12:
    - segments_2
    Bytes 9-12 are the Lucene "NameCounter" field as per the Lucene file format;
    The last 4 bytes also differ, since they are a checksum over the file:
    http://lucene.apache.org/java/2_9_1/fileformats.html#Segments%20File 

I'm not sure to what extent this is an Eclipse problem or a Lucene problem... if it's a Lucene problem it should be brought up with upstream. Suggestion would be to avoid dumping timestamps, and using a "NameCounter" algorithm that's not sensitive to the timestamp or folder being built in.
Comment 1 Martin Oberhuber CLA 2011-11-28 13:29:51 EST
I created 
    https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3607
to track this on the Lucene side.
Comment 2 Lars Vogel CLA 2019-11-14 03:34:53 EST
This bug hasn't had any activity in quite some time. Maybe the problem got resolved, was a duplicate of something else, or became less pressing for some reason - or maybe it's still relevant but just hasn't been looked at yet.

If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please add it. The information can be, for example, that the problem still occurs, that you still want the feature, that more information is needed, or that the bug is (for whatever reason) no longer relevant.

If the bug is still relevant, please remove the "stalebug" whiteboard tag.