geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Colasurdo <davec...@earthlink.net>
Subject Re: Building the geronimo servers using the packaging and assembly plugins
Date Wed, 30 Nov 2005 16:15:22 GMT
I'm trying to build using the new scheme and have a noticed a few issues.

I ran a top-level build and killed the build during during the 
modules/assembly phase.  I then built the plugins successfully.
However, couldn't build /configs using "maven -o multiproject:install" 
since some of the dependencies were missing from my local repo..   Had 
to reissue excluding the -o and it worked fine though did notice a few 
things:

-Seems that each project in configs downloads many of the same 
dependencies (over and over).  This takes quite sometime. I guess this 
is due to each project having it's own list of dependencies. Any chance 
of consolidation here?

-Received slews of the following error: log4j:ERROR Attempted to append 
to closed appender named [null].

This did build successfully..

The next step was to build the servers (e.g. /assemblies/j2ee-jetty-server)

I'm getting the following error:

    BUILD FAILED
    No goal [assemble:install-assembly]
    A plugin has attempted to use a goal that does not exist

maven.xml has the following:

<project default="default" >
  <goal name="default" prereqs="assemble:install-assembly"/>
</project>


Though it looks like install-assembly is commented out in 
\plugins\geronimo-assembly-plugin\plugin.jelly.

Any Thoughts?

Thanks
-Dave-

David Jencks wrote:
> 
> On Nov 29, 2005, at 1:39 PM, Dave Colasurdo wrote:
> 
>> What is the status of the new packaging and assembly plugins?  I see 
>> they are checked in ..but also notice that the generated images are 
>> still missing some pieces (e.g. most of the /bin directory)..
> 
> 
> Right.  I have a lot of the tck working with this new build, and I'm 
> working on finishing up the configid change and hope to check it in 
> later today (I was aiming for yesterday).  I want to make sure the 
> required functionality is working before spending a lot of time on 
> things like scripts and integrating the build better.
> 
>>
>> Will we be using the new scheme (which includes each applications 
>> having it's own container specific project under configs) as the 
>> default for creating the v1 binaries?
> 
> 
> Unless something goes disasterously wrong, yes.
> 
>>
>> Will this replace the current default behavior for a top down build?
> 
> 
> ditto
> 
>>
>> Wondering whether modules/assembly/ still needs to be updated to 
>> pickup the examples or whether /configs and /assemblies will replace 
>> these?
> 
> 
> IMO modules/assembly will be going away soon.  I would try to wait for 
> the configid change before making a lot more configs/ projects to deploy 
> the samples.
> 
> thanks
> david jencks
> 
>>
>> Thanks
>> -Dave-
>>
>> David Jencks wrote:
>>
>>> I've been working on building the geronimo server with the packaging 
>>> and assembly plugins.  There are a few loose ends but I believe the 
>>> resulting servers work.  The build process is not yet completely 
>>> automated, so here is an outline of what to do.
>>> Please try it out and report problems.
>>> 1. build geronimo + openejb using maven -o, maven -o m:rebuild, or 
>>> some such.  You can stop the build when you get to the assembly 
>>> module, and certainly when you get to itests.
>>> 2. build the plugins explicitly:
>>> cd plugins
>>> maven -o multiproject:install
>>> cd ..
>>> 3. build the configs:
>>> cd configs
>>> maven -o multiproject:install
>>> cd ..
>>> This step uses the packaging plugin to build all the configurations 
>>> we need for both jetty and tomcat servers, and installs them in your 
>>> local maven repo as .car files.
>>> 4. build the servers:
>>> cd assemblies
>>> cd j2ee-jetty-server
>>> maven -o clean default
>>> cd ../j2ee-tomcat-server
>>> maven -o clean default
>>> ------------------------------------
>>> Warning:
>>> The configIds of these configurations are incompatible with the 
>>> configIds used by the previous assembly.  If you deploy anything on 
>>> these servers and you specify a parentId or an import you will have 
>>> to modify them.
>>> I have not tried to deploy any applications to either of these 
>>> servers, but the welcome and console apps seem to work fine.
>>> Known limitations:
>>> The database for the juddi server is not yet constructed
>>> The j2ee schema files are not yet included in the server
>>> I've had some problems with the console on tomcat, but I think the 
>>> version in svn currently works.  I'm trying to finish up some changes 
>>> on my machine and check in the "next version" of tomcat directory setup.
>>> Thanks!
>>> david jencks
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message