hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From psm...@aconex.com
Subject Re: Maven assembly speed issue (from discussion with jdcryans on IRC)
Date Mon, 15 Mar 2010 21:28:59 GMT
Did assembly:directory not keep the directory? Or are you saying the  
other 2 archives were not produced (this being because we removed the  
2 descriptor refs)



On 16/03/2010, at 7:56, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:

> I tried beta2.  It only assembled the bin.tar.gz.  The beta3 did same.
> For now I just put back beta5 since it works (if slow).
>
> Thanks Paul,
> St.Ack
>
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 4:29 PM, Paul Smith <psmith@aconex.com> wrote:
>> ahhh, sorry guys!
>>
>> umm, I think we'll have to find a sweet spot between beta-1 and  
>> beta-5.
>>
>> From the assembly plugin docs:
>>
>> http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-assembly-plugin/assembly.html  
>> (binaries section)
>>
>> outputFileNameMapping   Sets the mapping pattern for all NON- 
>> UNPACKED dependencies included in this assembly. Default is $ 
>> {module.artifactId}-${module.version}${dashClassifier?}.$ 
>> {module.extension}. (Since 2.2-beta-2; 2.2-beta-1 uses $ 
>> {artifactId}-${version}${dashClassifier?}.${extension}) NOTE: If  
>> the dependencySet specifies unpack == true, outputFileNameMapping  
>> WILL NOT BE USED; in these cases, use outputDirectory. The default  
>> value is ${module.artifactId}-${module.version}${dashClassifier?}.$ 
>> {module.extension}.
>>
>>
>> so maybe try beta-2.. ?
>>
>> my apologise.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> On 15/03/2010, at 5:41 AM, Alexey Kovyrin 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