The results of the c++ compilation are .so files which are already in the binary.release.tar.gz file. And after I untag that .gz into my installation directory, the .so files will be in the correct location for Accumulo to find them?
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 11:46 PM, Christopher <[email protected]> wrote: > What other things should be included in the binary packaging that > aren't, and what other things are included that shouldn't be? > > -- > Christopher L Tubbs II > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii > > > On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 11:45 PM, Christopher <[email protected]> wrote: > > I went through all the rpms and debs and tarballs to check to see if > > they were including the right things (ACCUMULO-1404). > > > > Personally, I don't think they should be in a binary-release... source > > code that needs to be compiled sounds like something you'd get out of > > the source tarball, so I assumed its inclusion was an oversight that I > > was correcting. (I did make sure the *.so files were included.) If > > there's a reason to keep source code in a binary package, then, I can > > add it back in, but really, if you can't use it out of the box, I'm > > not sure it should be in the binary tarball. > > > > This is related to another issue I was looking at also, so i'll mention > it here: > > What do we include for proxy thrift bindings? I see that currently > > we're dropping in the gen-rb, gen-java, and gen-py folders from the > > proxy thrift compilation. However, I'm not so sure we should be doing > > this... because: > > > > 1) we don't need to include java bindings for the proxy; compiled > > versions are already in the proxy jar, > > 2) not all packagers will even have installed thrift with the ability > > to produce ruby and python bindings, > > 3) these may or may not be helpful to any particular end user (though > > it's probably safe to assume ruby and python will be the most common), > > 4) we're not including the proxy.thrift file, which is perhaps the > > most important file for the proxy, and including it should be > > sufficient. > > > > > > > > -- > > Christopher L Tubbs II > > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii > > > > > > On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 11:22 PM, David Medinets > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I ran this command: > >> > >> git clone --branch 1.5 https://github.com/apache/accumulo.git > >> > >> then compiled to get a binary-release.tar.gz file. That gz file does not > >> seem to contain the C++ files to build the native libraries. Should > they be > >> there? I don't recall hearing about removing them. >
