Hi Rick, Ok, thanks for the information.
BTW: As noted earlier I attached the Assembly support stuff to JIRA http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-217. Is there any interest to take this over as a contribution to the Felix project ? Otherwise, I would close the issue again. Thanks for any feedback. Regards Felix On 3/2/07, Rick Litton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Felix Meschberger wrote: > Just being curious, what exactly did you patch in InstallerImpl (and > ResolverImpl) ? Hi Felix, Actually, I created a class called LocalResolverImpl which extends from ResolverImpl. It was meant to deal with the categorization of bundles into "updatable bundles" and "installable bundles" and to search for a "capable resource" by matching capabilities and requirements. This created the potential for intercepting the update process at a certain point sometime later. The InstallerImpl was actually built from the ground up although it pretty much also does the install operation. Similar to your class, it delegates the actual work of deploying the updated or new bundle to the resolver and manages the startlevel of these bundles. Regards. Rick Litton -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Felix Meschberger Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 12:52 AM To: felix-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Leveraging OBR's generic dependency mechanism Hi Rick, Thanks for the update. Just being curious, what exactly did you patch in InstallerImpl (and ResolverImpl) ? Regards Felix On 3/2/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > FW: Leveraging OBR's generic dependency mechanismHi Felix, > > Felix Meschberger wrote on 2/22/2007: > > >Hi, > > >> Apparently, there is only a single queueHandler > >> thread which handles the events. I must be missing something. > > > The thread is started at the end of the AssemblyManager.start method, > > which > > first gathers existing bundles to jump start the Assembly Manager with > > simulated events for them. The AssemblyManager.start method itself is > > called > > from AssemblyActivator (the BundleActivator) start method... > > >> My question is how does the installer handle direct and > >> indirect dependencies if those dependencies are also required to be > >> updated? > > > Ok. This depends. If the dependencies are included with the assembly, > > there > > lifecycle is controlled through the Assembly Bundle. If the dependencies > > are > > not included in the assembly, and an OBR is used to install the bundles, > > the > > dependencies will be resolved by the OBR and just started by the > > AssemblyManager (these are the requiredResources of the Resolver). They > > are > > not further managed by the AssemblyManager, they are just there. > > > If the dependencies not managed by the AssemblyManage happen to require > an > > update due to updated requirements of managed bundles, these updates may > > take place as a "side effect" of OBR bundle resolution. > > > So for complete management, it might be a good idea to include all > > dependencies as far as possible in the Assembly. Again: This is a > > management > > task based on a management decision outside of the framework and not a > > technically required task ! > > > Regards > > Felix > > I should have responded much earlier, but instead I would just like to > provide you with a quick update. Apparently, our automated update process > using OBR seems to be working. Thanks to your examples and by following > Richard's original suggestion consisting of 4 steps, I was able to build > a > customized version of InstallerImpl and ResolverImpl. The whole process > is > triggered when a local repository is detected. The approach I have taken > was to identify updatable bundles (those that have an older version) from > the installable bundles (those that are entirely new) up front. By > matching > capabilities and requirements, I was then able to build a list of > resources > that could be installed, lining them up in a stack, to ensure that the > required dependencies pulled in were installed first. So far the update > seems to work provided that there were no cyclical dependencies which in > our > case, we took the effort to avoid. Of course, this doesn't sound so ideal > but it's currently the situation which I know will improve over time as > the > benefits of a service architecture are fully realized. > > One issue I encountered was with the LocalRepositoryImpl. I may have it > wrong but apparently its m_local variable points to the .felix cache > instead > of the actual "physical" repository. To resolve this issue, I had to > create > a "map" of the repository so that resources can be discovered and > eventually > the actual bundles are installed. I also found that the getURL method of > the resource returns null but that was overcome with this workaround. > Although some more work remains to be completed, overall the direction > looks > okay. > > And to those who will be at EclipseCon next week, I hope to meet up with > you > at the conference! > > Best regards. > Rick > > >
