I just did a clean checkout / build and run the tests, stupid question.
Do you have python* yum'ed.
If so might need to get one of the Java guys to help. watching the game
so will try to reproduce on my wifes
"clean" FC7 install.
Carl.
James Cooper wrote:
Sure, I'd be happy to try building it.
I checkout the svn repository, and tried this:
cd qpid/qpid/java/common
mvn compile
and it downloaded a ton of dependencies, but bailed with this:
[INFO]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
[INFO] artifact org.apache.qpid:jython-plugin: checking for updates
from apache.snapshots
[INFO] artifact org.apache.qpid:jython-plugin: checking for updates
from codehaus.snapshots
[INFO] artifact org.apache.qpid:jython-plugin: checking for updates
from central
[INFO]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[ERROR] BUILD ERROR
[INFO]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[INFO] The plugin 'org.apache.qpid:jython-plugin' does not exist or no
valid version could be found
[INFO]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- James
On 10/24/07, *Carl Trieloff* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
Got it, the Java client 2-8 is not posted in the download page -
might be tomorrow before I can get the matching Java client posted
in rpm form.
Want me to tell you how to build it? I will get the matching java
rpm posted tomorrow.
Carl.
James Cooper wrote:
Hi Carl,
Thanks for the quick reply. Still no dice, but the results are a
little different.
On the server I ran:
yum remove qpidd
rpm -Uvh qpidc-0.2-8.i386.rpm
rpm -Uvh qpidd-0.2-8.i386.rpm
[ [EMAIL PROTECTED] src]# qpidd -t
Re-ran my test program.
Output from Java client:
main 2007-10-24 17:05:56,407 INFO
[apache.qpid.client.AMQConnection ]
Connection:amqp://guest:[EMAIL
PROTECTED]/test?brokerlist='tcp://turbo.bitmechanic.com:5672'
main 2007-10-24 17:05:56,502 WARN
[qpid.client.transport.TransportConnection] Using Mina NIO
main 2007-10-24 17:05:56,515 INFO [
qpid.client.transport.SocketTransportConnection] send-buffer-size
= 32768
main 2007-10-24 17:05:56,516 INFO
[qpid.client.transport.SocketTransportConnection]
recv-buffer-size = 32768
main 2007-10-24 17:05:56,814 INFO [
qpid.client.transport.SocketTransportConnection] Attempting
connection to turbo.bitmechanic.com/209.40.199.163:5672
<http://turbo.bitmechanic.com/209.40.199.163:5672>
Output from qpidd:
2007-Oct-24 17:05:50 info Persistence not enabled, no recovery
attempted.
2007-Oct-24 17:05:50 info Listening on port 5672
2007-Oct-24 17:05:56 debug INIT [ 75.172.72.232:49723
<http://75.172.72.232:49723>]
2007-Oct-24 17:05:56 debug SENT [ 75.172.72.232:49723
<http://75.172.72.232:49723>]: Frame[channel=0;
ConnectionStartBody: version-major=8; version-minor=0;
server-properties={}; mechanisms=PLAIN; locales=en_US]
So the error message on the client went away, but the
AMQConnection() constructor never returns.
thoughts?
-- James
On 10/24/07, *Carl Trieloff* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
ok, yes I see the issue.. it is different versions of the
wire protocol.
We build on every check-in. Builds that all the tests pass
are posted at http://rhm.et.redhat.com/download/
If you pick up the packages with *-0.2-*.rpm the latest of
cpp broker, cpp client, java client and python client will
all work together. I'll get this pushed to yum repo. Let us
know if you find any issues and so we can fix.
Carl.
James Cooper wrote:
Sure thing. My cursory testing today wasn't very fruitful,
but that's largely because I don't know what I'm doing!
Not sure if this is useful info, but here's what I found:
Server: qpidd - 0.2-5.fc7.i386
Client: qpid-java-1.0-incubator-M1-bin-client
Java code:
public static void main(String argv) throws Exception {
// this blocks forever:
AMQConnection conn = new AMQConnection("
amqp://guest:[EMAIL
PROTECTED]/test?brokerlist='tcp://turbo.bitmechanic.com:5672'");
// We never get here:
System.out.println("Got connection!");
}
Output on Java side:
main 2007-10-24 16:12:07,631 INFO
[apache.qpid.client.AMQConnection]
Connection:amqp://guest:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
/test?brokerlist='tcp://turbo.bitmechanic.com:5672'
main 2007-10-24 16:12:07,728 WARN
[qpid.client.transport.TransportConnection ] Using Mina NIO
main 2007-10-24 16:12:07,744 INFO
[qpid.client.transport.SocketTransportConnection]
send-buffer-size = 32768
main 2007-10-24 16:12:07,744 INFO
[qpid.client.transport.SocketTransportConnection]
recv-buffer-size = 32768
main 2007-10-24 16:12:07,788 INFO
[qpid.client.transport.SocketTransportConnection] Attempting
connection to turbo.bitmechanic.com/209.40.199.163:5672
<http://turbo.bitmechanic.com/209.40.199.163:5672>
AnonymousIoService-3 2007-10-24 16:12:07,938 WARN
[apache.qpid.framing.AMQDataBlockDecoder]
AMQDataBlockDecoder does not handle frame type 9
Output on server side:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] log]# qpidd -t
WARNING: Persistence not enabled, no recovery of queues or
messages.
Listening on port 5672...
INIT [0x98642c0]
SENT [0x98642c0]: Frame[channel=0; request(id=1,mark=0):
ConnectionStart: versionMajor=8; versionMinor=0;
serverProperties={}; mechanisms=PLAIN; locales=en_US]
Not sure if the C++ broker and Java M1 client are designed
to interop at this point. That's sort of what it looks like
-- some wire protocol mismatch.
any ideas? or is this just user error?
-- James
On 10/24/07, *Carl Trieloff* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
James,
I expect we will be pushing an update soon.. If you want
to help do some
of the shake
down testing on the next release, shoot and I will see
if I can get an
update pushed in
the next few days.
Carl.
James Cooper wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> Just stumbled on your project today. Looking for
something a bit easier for
> my SAs to install than ActiveMQ and wanted interop
between Python/Java.
> This could be the ticket.
>
> Looks like the users list is just getting spun up.
>
> First question: Is it productive for me to start doing
some testing against
> the qpidd that Fedora 7 ships with? I just did a naive
"yum install qpidd"
> and it fires up. Since you guys are moving pretty
quickly I'm not sure if
> reports I make about that build will be useful for you.
>
> Are there plans to release patch releases to the yum
repository servers?
>
> thanks,
>
> -- James
>
>
