www-infrastructure-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Robert Muir (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (INFRA-3512) support for pseudo filesystems such as devfs/procfs/linprocfs in lucene jail
Date Sun, 13 Mar 2011 00:22:59 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-3512?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13006113#comment-13006113
] 

Robert Muir commented on INFRA-3512:
------------------------------------

Hi Gavin, thank you, the procfs and devfs are working.

However, the linprocfs does not exist (e.g. /compat/linux/proc is empty).

I tried to find some information about how to mount linprocfs for a jail, the best I can find
is here: http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=6019

> support for pseudo filesystems such as devfs/procfs/linprocfs in lucene jail
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: INFRA-3512
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-3512
>             Project: Infrastructure
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>      Security Level: public(Regular issues) 
>          Components: Zones/Jails
>         Environment: Lucene freebsd jail
>            Reporter: Robert Muir
>
> We use our lucene jail for running hudson tasks (such as unit tests), but there are a
few issues with java that could be resolved if we were able to mount some pseudo-filesystems
(devfs, procfs, linprocfs) in our jail.
> For some brief background: we sometimes encounter bugs in java (ref: http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/SunJavaBugs),
and without a recent java version, we encounter problems.
> Unfortunately, the most recent ports/packages in freebsd require pseudo-filesystem such
as procfs to work correctly, so we are unable to use them.
> At the moment we are resorting to a combination of hacks to workaround this problem,
including:
> * compiling with one version of java and testing with another
> * hacks to the source code to work around compiler bugs
> * hacks to the tests to work around runtime crashes.
> For reference, the available "types of java" in freebsd are:
> * java/diablo-jdkXX, java/jdkXX: these packages are very out of date, and very buggy.
We cannot even compile our source code with these without hacks, and running tests with them
is not possible.
> * java/linux-sun-jdkXX: these packages are the most up-to-date, but require linprocfs
to function. I tested this without linprocfs and it definitely does not work.
> * java/openjdkXX: these packages are reasonably up-to-date, but now require procfs to
function, see http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/java/openjdk6/pkg-message?rev=1.2
for example. We are currently working with an older version that claims it only requires devfs
(which we also don't have, but it doesn't appear to be causing issues), however we cannot
upgrade this to the latest version because we do not have procfs, I tested this without procfs
and it definitely does not work.
> Due to the lack of devfs/procfs/linprocfs, we are using a combination of compiling with
diablo-jdk15 (with some hacks to our source code to work around bugs), and running with an
outdated openjdk16 package (with hacks to prevent crashes).
> So, it would save us a lot of time if we had these filesystems available, so we could
use more up-to-date versions. It would also allow us to actually run our tests against the
versions of java we claim to support, which we cannot do at all right now for java 5.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

Mime
View raw message