lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Erik Hatcher <>
Subject Re: two versioning problems with Lucene
Date Thu, 09 Dec 2004 09:52:37 GMT
To address the issue Bill just brought up, I refer you to the 
documentation of the Ant <jar> task.  Check out the filesetmanifest 
attribute options:

I have not yet tried this relatively new (as of Ant 1.6, since we 
didn't write about it in Java Development with Ant), but it looks like 
it addresses the concern of repackaging and keeping the manifest 
version information from being lost.


On Dec 8, 2004, at 8:36 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>> I'd like to hear others weigh in on this repackaging issue.  Is this a
>> common practice?
> The usual problem I see is that the user wants a single-file
> "double-clickable" application packaged as a jar file.  So you unpack
> the subsidiary jars, usually libraries like Lucene or Simple, and
> then build a new jar file which contains all the classes of the
> various unpacked jars, with a Makefile line like this:
>    ${JAR} uf $@ `find . -name \*.class`
> Since all the META-INF/MANIFEST.MF files wind up in the same place
> during unpacking of the various jar files, only the information in the
> last one unpacked is preserved, but the user typically builds their
> own jar manifest anyway.  I agree with you that a careful user might
> (and perhaps should) put the right stuff in their jar manifest, but
> I'm not sure I want to depend on it.
> I've seen this in a number of places, but that may just be my 
> experience.
> Bill
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message