ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "GOMEZ Henri" <hgo...@slib.fr>
Subject RE: RPMs (Was: Ant 1.5alpha refresh notice) (fwd)
Date Mon, 22 Apr 2002 08:38:54 GMT
Just subscribed to ant-dev rigth now

>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 00:03:41 +1000
>From: Conor MacNeill <conor@cortexebusiness.com.au>
>Reply-To: Ant Developers List <ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
>To: Ant Developers List <ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
>Subject: RPMs (Was: Ant 1.5alpha refresh notice)
>
>Magesh Umasankar wrote:
> >
>
>> It would be awesome if somebody could test to
>> see if the rpms work as expected and let me know.
>
> >
>
>We should decide before this release goes out whether we wish 
>to publish an Ant 
>specific RPM or to continue to have RPMs built by Henri Gomez.

Hi Conor,

Costin forwarded me this mail since I wasn't yet subscribed to 
ant-dev list.

But it will change since I'll start new work in my day job 
with creating custom ant task, I'll hope to send back to apache.

A task to apply a translator dictionnary to HTML/JSP files to
help internationalisation...

Let speak rpm now

>When I got the RPM building to work, my goal was to allow us 
>to build a complete 
>distribution including the RPMs. It meant that the RPM build 
>would be in sync 
>with the other distributions. Previously the RPMs were built 
>quite differently, 
>using Jikes, not building the full optional jar, etc.

As you may know, there is a current project, jpackage,
www.jpackage.org, which take care of inter-projects dependencies,
and make sure that you have what is required to use a tool like
ant.

As you know the RPM policies are to allways provide source for
binaries and do the best to build a new binary (ie ant) again
allready present binary (ie xerces).

But some recent parsers like crimson/xerces need ant to build. 
And since ant need a xml parser like (in rpm policies) you've
got a chicken and eggs problems :[

>The RPMs that are currently built as part of the Ant build 
>consider Ant in 
>isolation. They just put Ant somewhere sensible and what you 
>get is pretty much 
>what you would get if you were to unzip a zip distribution. 

In fact there are two ant rpms :

- one for jakarta with lower dependencies 
  (use parser provided in source tarball to build), a sort 
  of minimal rpm which didn't follow rpm policies.

- the one for jpackage project which is very strict in term of
  dependencies but you need to have some binary rpms installed
  before building ant :
 
>Henri's RPMs, OTOH, 
>are built as part of the larger java RPM project. There are 
>richer dependencies 
>(JAXP is a dependency, IIRC), a separate Ant launch script, no 
>parser jars 
>included, documentation is somewhere else, etc.
>
>Thoughts?

We're working hard on jpackage project to have good rpms for
apache projects and I'd like to avoid duplicate works for
apache / jpackage rpms. 

If we could use in apache the jpackage rpms, it will be
a definitive plus and will help RPMs users (Linux/OpenPKG)
have a viable Java distribution.

Regards

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:ant-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message