On Thu, 27 Jan 2005, Mark Taylor wrote:
> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 11:54:21 +0000
> From: Mark Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
> Reply-To: Starlink development <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Starlink Nightly Build On System: DEBIAN-3.0r3_i386
>
> On Thu, 27 Jan 2005, Peter W. Draper wrote:
>
> > Hi Mark,
> >
> > the export target was supposed to be used for creating an archive of the
> > installed state of a package so that you could then just pass these out as
> > updates or releases (along with all the other dependencies). The simplest
> > use being just to untar/unzip the archives (possibly into an existing
> > starjava tree) and off you'd go.
> >
> > In fact all the export targets are a little broken and need some work, the
> > main reason being that they prepend the package name onto all the archive
> > content, so cannot in fact be just unpacked. If Steve is going to do
> > RPM/whatever package-level releases I guess this will have to change soon.
>
> Another issue is the fact that file permissions - in particular the
> execute bit - are currently lost when the zip/tar archives are built
> (I seem to recall you can get round this for <tar> by not using explicit
> <tarfileset> elements, but not for <zip>).
Good point, I'd forgotten about that one. It does make the export target
even more useless. I see that as of ANT 1.5.2 you can define two sets of
permissions in zip files, 755 & 644, I guess the trick is to get the right
files into the right <zipfileset> (tarfileset seems to work the same way).
Of course jar files don't give you any control over permissions at all.
> I could go through and fix the build files to the extent that the export
> target works at least, but this would probably consist of just
> commenting out things that cause trouble. In view of what you say
> however, maybe it would make most sense if the nightly build doesn't
> attempt the 'ant export' test until such time as we get round to
> making this do something working/useful, when we can look at each one
> individually and check it's doing something sensible.
> I *think* (though haven't tested recently) that the export-full*
> targets ought to work, so they can stay.
>
> Agree?
Yes, makes sense for the moment. Steve can you switch off the
package-level exports for the moment?
Peter.
|