Community
Participate
Working Groups
I hand-crafted a repo of the 2.5.0M5 zip for e4 build consumption. Would it be possible to add an extra step when creating your update zip to add the p2 content and artifact metadata? My manual step after I unzipped: e3.5M4/eclipse/eclipse \ -noSplash \ -application org.eclipse.equinox.p2.metadata.generator.EclipseGenerator \ -updateSite $(pwd)/ \ -site file:$(pwd)/site.xml \ -metadataRepository file:$(pwd)/ \ -metadataRepositoryName "EMF Update Site" \ -artifactRepository file:$(pwd)/ \ -artifactRepositoryName "EMF Artifacts" \ -compress \ -append \ -reusePack200Files \ -noDefaultIUs \ -vmargs -Xmx256m PW
It would, yes. To be clear, is it acceptable to include both update site and p2 repo in the same bundle? site.xml artifacts.jar content.jar features/*.jar plugins/*.jar Or do we have to remove site.xml once artifacts.* and content.* are generated? And, should this include the packed jars, or the regular update jars? And, since it's a zip, should artifacts.xml and content.xml be included instead of artifacts.jar and content.jar? You have the "-compress" flag listed in comment 0, but would it be more efficient to include the uncompressed xml?
(In reply to comment #1) > It would, yes. Thanx :-) > To be clear, is it acceptable to include both update site and p2 repo in the > same bundle? Yes, I believe so (and it works fine in the repos I'm using for e4). p2 will look for the repo first, and then try and generate metadata from a site.xml later. I've included John to answer the last 2 questions. My own guess would be that it's a good idea to include the content.jar and packed jars, so that the repo would be optimal if expanded on a mirror site as well as consumed locally from the zip. > And, should this include the packed jars, or the regular update jars? > > And, since it's a zip, should artifacts.xml and content.xml be included instead > of artifacts.jar and content.jar? You have the "-compress" flag listed in > comment 0, but would it be more efficient to include the uncompressed xml? PW
*** Bug 265705 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
(In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > It would, yes. > > Thanx :-) > > > To be clear, is it acceptable to include both update site and p2 repo in the > > same bundle? > Yes, I believe so (and it works fine in the repos I'm using for e4). p2 will > look for the repo first, and then try and generate metadata from a site.xml > > And, should this include the packed jars, or the regular update jars? > it's a good idea to include the content.jar and packed jars, so that the repo > would be optimal if expanded on a mirror site as well as consumed locally from > the zip. Only wrinkle here is if the target platform doesn't have Java 5, or if it's targeting Eclipse 3.3 or earlier. For PDT 2.x, this isn't a problem. For Modeling, this is also not an issue. Anthony, can you comment on GEF? Would GEF 3.5 update site need to work for an Eclipse 3.3 user and/or an Eclipse 3.5 user w/ JDK 1.4? > > And, since it's a zip, should artifacts.xml and content.xml be included instead > > of artifacts.jar and content.jar? You have the "-compress" flag listed in > > comment 0, but would it be more efficient to include the uncompressed xml? John, your thoughts?
(In reply to comment #4) > Eclipse 3.3 user and/or an Eclipse 3.5 user w/ JDK 1.4? Yes, GEF supports JDK 1.4, but if p2 is broken with JDK 1.4, what is the answer?
(In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #4) > > Eclipse 3.3 user and/or an Eclipse 3.5 user w/ JDK 1.4? > Yes, GEF supports JDK 1.4, but if p2 is broken with JDK 1.4, what is the > answer? Option a) Everything is packed: "You need JDK 5+ to install GEF using this update zip, but JDK 1.4+ to run GEF." Lame, I know. Option b) We produce two variants: the unpacked p2 repo/update site hybrid without pack200 jars for GEF, and the pack200'd version for Modeling & PDT. Option c) Nothing is packed: one repo for both the 1.4+ and 5.0+ world.
(In reply to comment #6) > Option a) Everything is packed: "You need JDK 5+ to install GEF using this > update zip, but JDK 1.4+ to run GEF." Lame, I know. > > Option b) We produce two variants: the unpacked p2 repo/update site hybrid > without pack200 jars for GEF, and the pack200'd version for Modeling & PDT. > > Option c) Nothing is packed: one repo for both the 1.4+ and 5.0+ world. > We need to do what the platform does, GEF is on 1.4 only because the platform is still on 1.4. GEF wanted to move to 1.5 in the past, but we were told to stay consistent with the platform. p.s. I personally think we are way past the point of it being a sane position to support Java 1.4.
(In reply to comment #7) > (In reply to comment #6) > > Option a) Everything is packed: "You need JDK 5+ to install GEF using this > > update zip, but JDK 1.4+ to run GEF." Lame, I know. > > > > Option b) We produce two variants: the unpacked p2 repo/update site hybrid > > without pack200 jars for GEF, and the pack200'd version for Modeling & PDT. > > > > Option c) Nothing is packed: one repo for both the 1.4+ and 5.0+ world. > > > > We need to do what the platform does, GEF is on 1.4 only because the platform > is still on 1.4. GEF wanted to move to 1.5 in the past, but we were told to > stay consistent with the platform. > > p.s. I personally think we are way past the point of it being a sane position > to support Java 1.4. Well, Option a would push you (sorta) into the 5.0 world - this is after all only for offline archived p2 repos - other options (p2 repo, SDK zip) remain unchanged. Option b is the most work, so I'm least interested in that solution. :) Option c would work as well as option a, but be a bigger footprint on mirrors. A is the best choice, if you're willing to state you're OK telling people that these zips will only work w/ 5.0+. Please sign here: ______________. ;)
As of 2008/04/08 02:00, update zips will contain p2 metadata and packed plugin jars (but regular feature jars - bug 269199) if packed jars exist; otherwise update zip will contain feature/plugin jars. Need to verify this change doesn't break anyone w/ this week's builds.
*** Bug 272000 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
(In reply to comment #9) > As of 2008/04/08 02:00, update zips will contain p2 metadata and packed plugin > jars (but regular feature jars - bug 269199) if packed jars exist; otherwise > update zip will contain feature/plugin jars. > Need to verify this change doesn't break anyone w/ this week's builds. Zips look good for this week's EMF and GEF I builds. Closing.
