hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stack <saint....@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Maven assembly speed issue (from discussion with jdcryans on IRC)
Date Sun, 14 Mar 2010 20:41:23 GMT
It's broke for me too.   Will revert soon



On Mar 14, 2010, at 11:41 AM, Alexey Kovyrin <alexey@kovyrin.net> wrote:

> I've tried to build the trunk a few minutes ago (after pulling those
> changes in assembly plugin) and I've noticed a few problems:
>
> 1) here is how the target dir looks after mvn package
> assembly:directory, this feels wrong: http://gist.github.com/332129
> 2) ./bin/hbase is completely broken because of the change in the
> target directory name (.dir suffix)
>
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 11:20 AM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
>> I committed the change.  Its much faster.  Thanks lads.
>> St.Ack
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 10:34 PM,  <psmith@aconex.com> wrote:
>>> Yep i would downgrade to beta-1 in the pluginmanagement section  
>>> it's way
>>> faster.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 14/03/2010, at 14:35, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I did this bit of the patch:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> @@ -308,10 +309,6 @@
>>>>        <descriptors>
>>>>          <descriptor>src/assembly/bin.xml</descriptor>
>>>>        </descriptors>
>>>> -          <descriptorRefs>
>>>> -            <descriptorRef>src</descriptorRef>
>>>> -            <descriptorRef>project</descriptorRef>
>>>> -          </descriptorRefs>
>>>>      </configuration>
>>>>    </plugin>
>>>>  </plugins>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ... but as Lars says, there is a version up in the pluginManagement
>>>> section.  Should I downgrade from beta5 to beta1?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks lads,
>>>> St>Ack
>>>> On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 7:36 PM, Lars Francke <lars.francke@gmail.com

>>>> >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Because the current pom doesn't specify a plugin version, it's  
>>>>>> using the
>>>>>> latest version.
>>>>>
>>>>> The pluginManagement section actually does specify a plugin  
>>>>> version:
>>>>> 2.2-beta-5. But if that does cause problems - and the ticket you
>>>>> linked to proves that feel free to downgrade but I would  
>>>>> appreciate it
>>>>> if you did it in the pluginManagement section. I don't have  
>>>>> access to
>>>>> the source code right now so I can't provide an updated patch.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm swamped right now but I plan to continue working on the Maven
>>>>> build as well once everything has settled down. Thanks for  
>>>>> keeping up
>>>>> the good work on this Paul!
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Lars
>>>>>
>>>> Return-Path: hbase-dev-return-18272-psmith=aconex.com@hadoop.apache.org
>>>> Received: from gatekeeper.aconex.com (LHLO gatekeeper.aconex.com)
>>>> (192.168.102.10) by mail-au.aconex.com with LMTP; Sun, 14 Mar 2010
>>>> 14:35:27
>>>> +1100 (EST)
>>>> Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
>>>>   by gatekeeper.aconex.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ECCE4884AB
>>>>   for <psmith@aconex.com>; Sun, 14 Mar 2010 14:35:27 +1100 (EST)
>>>> X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at aconex.com
>>>> Received: from gatekeeper.aconex.com ([127.0.0.1])
>>>>   by localhost (gatekeeper.aconex.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new,  
>>>> port
>>>> 10024)
>>>>   with ESMTP id km2MgDbjPJTS for <psmith@aconex.com>;
>>>>   Sun, 14 Mar 2010 14:35:23 +1100 (EST)
>>>> Received: from postoffice2.aconex.com (cuda.yarra.acx  
>>>> [192.168.102.2])
>>>>   by gatekeeper.aconex.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BC0B4884A0
>>>>   for <psmith@aconex.com>; Sun, 14 Mar 2010 14:35:23 +1100 (EST)
>>>> X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1268537722-21ea001d0000-Y2sTMG
>>>> X-Barracuda-URL: http://postoffice2.aconex.com:8000/cgi-bin/ 
>>>> mark.cgi
>>>> Received: from postoffice.aconex.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
>>>>   by postoffice2.aconex.com (Spam & Virus Firewall) with ESMTP id
>>>> A54D865A545
>>>>   for <psmith@aconex.com>; Sun, 14 Mar 2010 14:35:22 +1100 (EST)
>>>> Received: from postoffice.aconex.com (postoffice.yarra.acx
>>>> [192.168.102.1]) by postoffice2.aconex.com with ESMTP id  
>>>> rYMmYXVfAMBHWHz8
>>>> for <psmith@aconex.com>; Sun, 14 Mar 2010 14:35:22 +1100 (EST)
>>>> X-Barracuda-Envelope-From:
>>>> hbase-dev-return-18272-psmith=aconex.com@hadoop.apache.org
>>>> Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3])
>>>>   by postoffice.aconex.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B0B5BA50280
>>>>   for <psmith@aconex.com>; Sun, 14 Mar 2010 14:32:37 +1100 (EST)
>>>> Received: (qmail 28038 invoked by uid 500); 14 Mar 2010 03:35:20  
>>>> -0000
>>>> Mailing-List: contact hbase-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by  
>>>> ezmlm
>>>> Precedence: bulk
>>>> List-Help: <mailto:hbase-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org>
>>>> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:hbase-dev-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org>
>>>> List-Post: <mailto:hbase-dev@hadoop.apache.org>
>>>> List-Id: <hbase-dev.hadoop.apache.org>
>>>> Reply-To: hbase-dev@hadoop.apache.org
>>>> Delivered-To: mailing list hbase-dev@hadoop.apache.org
>>>> Received: (qmail 28030 invoked by uid 99); 14 Mar 2010 03:35:20  
>>>> -0000
>>>> Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136

>>>> )
>>>>   by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 14 Mar 2010  
>>>> 03:35:20 +0000
>>>> X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0
>>>>    
>>>> tests= 
>>>> FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL
>>>> X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
>>>> Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of  
>>>> saint.ack@gmail.com
>>>> designates 209.85.217.225 as permitted sender)
>>>> Received: from [209.85.217.225] (HELO mail-gx0-f225.google.com)
>>>> (209.85.217.225)
>>>>   by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 14 Mar 2010  
>>>> 03:35:19 +0000
>>>> Received: by gxk25 with SMTP id 25so1054366gxk.11
>>>>       for <hbase-dev@hadoop.apache.org>; Sat, 13 Mar 2010  
>>>> 19:34:58 -0800
>>>> (PST)
>>>> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
>>>>       d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
>>>>       h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:in-reply- 
>>>> to
>>>>        :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message- 
>>>> id:subject:from:to
>>>>        :content-type;
>>>>       bh=2XJuE3DRSu1PZi6mitn5hB/CWqgf8oZZg8Cq7kmSssE=;
>>>>        
>>>> b=R 
>>>> ZFvxOjcosPp1kKzR3S2IRyF3s6U3RShvv32DKopAtC3RpA7y1jvGLXadoM96FJI0Z
>>>>
>>>>   
>>>> YOxb2Yowwa4zIHn4mz3A8aj8TxvnefJ6Obu6uTWhOan1qgSI2KSIZQjKbQN9QyDsVSo0
 

>>>>        Z5lgnd67OEHNbQIGwY2x2amNg9t13BtblmtlY=
>>>> DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
>>>>       d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
>>>>       h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
>>>>        :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content- 
>>>> type;
>>>>       b=ohJ64CZsLYoxZXEC223B1Yjf039FwFNukpuGNPm7MSIp+GGT 
>>>> +SteBG2+DdAaTCQ7L7
>>>>
>>>>  VKVtv6tsSxIZCQjjhPmklrA1agRZY6ebfHgD5os7Ob2lZ/ 
>>>> AsSJyQwOlCZYgoRLm0L4nB
>>>>        ym72VyxsSZZedzkdFKkccGaQcf6544depe/Ug=
>>>> MIME-Version: 1.0
>>>> Sender: saint.ack@gmail.com
>>>> Received: by 10.101.42.12 with SMTP id u12mr332581anj. 
>>>> 56.1268537698290;
>>>> Sat,
>>>>   13 Mar 2010 19:34:58 -0800 (PST)
>>>> In-Reply-To: <fda1bfdd1003121936x6362dea5k3f37c2d4f17a9ed3@mail.gmail.com

>>>> >
>>>> References: <79B274BD-CB9A-4B81-B224-C0A7F85864EF@aconex.com>
>>>>    <fda1bfdd1003121936x6362dea5k3f37c2d4f17a9ed3@mail.gmail.com>
>>>> Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:34:58 -0800
>>>> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 2cf34d151e284d55
>>>> Message-ID: <7c962aed1003131934h7b03a75cs85ffbb164ff487fd@mail.gmail.com

>>>> >
>>>> X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: Maven assembly speed issue (from discussion  
>>>> with
>>>> jdcryans on IRC)
>>>> Subject: Re: Maven assembly speed issue (from discussion with  
>>>> jdcryans on
>>>> IRC)
>>>> From: Stack <stack@duboce.net>
>>>> To: hbase-dev@hadoop.apache.org
>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>>>> X-Barracuda-Connect: postoffice.yarra.acx[192.168.102.1]
>>>> X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1268537722
>>>> X-Barracuda-Bayes: INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.0000 1.0000 -2.0210
>>>> X-Barracuda-Virus-Scanned: by Aconex Staff Email Spam Firewall at
>>>> aconex.com
>>>> X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: -2.02
>>>> X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=-2.02 using global scores of
>>>> TAG_LEVEL=3.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=5.0 KILL_LEVEL=6.0 tests=
>>>> X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.2, rules version  
>>>> 3.2.2.24799
>>>>   Rule breakdown below
>>>>    pts rule name              description
>>>>   ---- ----------------------
>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> I did this bit of the patch:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> @@ -308,10 +309,6 @@
>>>>        <descriptors>
>>>>          <descriptor>src/assembly/bin.xml</descriptor>
>>>>        </descriptors>
>>>> -          <descriptorRefs>
>>>> -            <descriptorRef>src</descriptorRef>
>>>> -            <descriptorRef>project</descriptorRef>
>>>> -          </descriptorRefs>
>>>>      </configuration>
>>>>    </plugin>
>>>>  </plugins>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ... but as Lars says, there is a version up in the pluginManagement
>>>> section.  Should I downgrade from beta5 to beta1?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks lads,
>>>> St>Ack
>>>> On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 7:36 PM, Lars Francke <lars.francke@gmail.com

>>>> >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Because the current pom doesn't specify a plugin version, it's  
>>>>>> using the
>>>>>> latest version.
>>>>>
>>>>> The pluginManagement section actually does specify a plugin  
>>>>> version:
>>>>> 2.2-beta-5. But if that does cause problems - and the ticket you
>>>>> linked to proves that feel free to downgrade but I would  
>>>>> appreciate it
>>>>> if you did it in the pluginManagement section. I don't have  
>>>>> access to
>>>>> the source code right now so I can't provide an updated patch.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm swamped right now but I plan to continue working on the Maven
>>>>> build as well once everything has settled down. Thanks for  
>>>>> keeping up
>>>>> the good work on this Paul!
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Lars
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Alexey Kovyrin
> http://kovyrin.net/

Mime
View raw message