[JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is the build system too complicated?
I think I am going to split off the running (jboss, testsuite, whatever) bits into scripts (probably generated by the build system), which developers could then use to run things. This will allow for greater flexiblity (such as redirecting or not) and will simplify the build.xml files. Thanks for the feedback! --jason On Tue, 20 Nov 2001, Andreas Schaefer wrote: > No, the build system is great for me. The only thing I have some problems with > is to run JBoss through the build system because it does not send the output > to the console. > But compared to the old system it is great (good work well done). > > Andy > - Original Message - > From: Jason Dillon > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 1:43 PM > Subject: [jboss-docs] Is the build system too complicated? > > > Please let me know if you think that the build system is too complicated, or > if there is some part of the system which is too complicated. > > --jason > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > --- > Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Unsubscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archive: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jboss-docs/ > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
[JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is the build system too complicated?
It has often seemed to me that there is substantial duplication between the setup parts of the module level build.xml files. I sure haven't figured out a clue of a way to reduce this, but if it could be done, it might make the files a little less intimidating. In light of the vast improvement over the preceding build "system", this is a hardly visible quibble. david jencks On 2001.11.20 16:43:07 -0500 Jason Dillon wrote: > Please let me know if you think that the build system is too complicated, > or > if there is some part of the system which is too complicated. > > --jason > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~--> > Universal Inkjet Refill Kit $29.95 > Refill any ink cartridge for less! > Includes black and color ink. > http://us.click.yahoo.com/bAmslD/MkNDAA/ySSFAA/9rHolB/TM > -~-> > > --- > Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Unsubscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archive: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jboss-docs/ > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > > ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
[JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is the build system too complicated?
I have not found an easy way to provide this common setup/initialization stuff as a resource. Perhaps if I could tell the JAXP parser to read a resource file when parsing this could be done, but that would require the Ant entity hooks to be installed to handle that. Perhaps they have done that, perhaps I could sway them todo it... though my previous attempts to do so has failed (too much *ucking voting). If you can think of a way please let me know. Thanks for your feedback! --jason On Tue, 20 Nov 2001, David Jencks wrote: > It has often seemed to me that there is substantial duplication between the > setup parts of the module level build.xml files. I sure haven't figured > out a clue of a way to reduce this, but if it could be done, it might make > the files a little less intimidating. In light of the vast improvement > over the preceding build "system", this is a hardly visible quibble. > > david jencks > > On 2001.11.20 16:43:07 -0500 Jason Dillon wrote: > > Please let me know if you think that the build system is too complicated, > > or > > if there is some part of the system which is too complicated. > > > > --jason > > > > > > > > --- > > Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Unsubscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Archive: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jboss-docs/ > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~--> > Universal Inkjet Refill Kit $29.95 > Refill any ink cartridge for less! > Includes black and color ink. > http://us.click.yahoo.com/Vv.L9D/MkNDAA/ySSFAA/9rHolB/TM > -~-> > > --- > Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Unsubscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archive: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jboss-docs/ > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is the build system too complicated?
I do have a slightly off-topic gripe -- as of late, (in the rh snapshots),
jboss-all/tools/bin/ant has not been executable on UNIX systems (took my
little mind a while to figure out what was going on). The
jboss-all/build/build.sh script has been failing because of it. It looks
for an executable 'ant', but never finds it (it doesn't have the
executable bit set). I can see three possible solutions:
1. Just have the executable bit set on the ant script to start with
2. Change the search() function in build.sh to read like this:
search() {
search="$*"
for d in $search; do
ANT_HOME="`pwd`/$d"
ANT="$ANT_HOME/bin/ant"
# -- Begin modifications
# If the file exists at all, attempt to add the executable bit
if [ -e "$ANT" ]; then
`chmod +x $ANT`
fi
# -- End modifications
if [ -x "$ANT" ]; then
# found one
echo $ANT_HOME
break
fi
done
}
#(just added a -e test to see if the file exists, and attempt to make it
executable so that the next -x test works)
3. Skip looking for an executable ant script -- just make sure it exists,
and call it with 'sh ant'.
-jason
Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
11/20/2001 09:38 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:[JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is the build system too
complicated?
I have not found an easy way to provide this common setup/initialization
stuff as a resource. Perhaps if I could tell the JAXP parser to read a
resource file when parsing this could be done, but that would require the
Ant entity hooks to be installed to handle that.
Perhaps they have done that, perhaps I could sway them todo it... though
my
previous attempts to do so has failed (too much *ucking voting).
If you can think of a way please let me know.
Thanks for your feedback!
--jason
On Tue, 20 Nov 2001, David Jencks wrote:
> It has often seemed to me that there is substantial duplication between
the
> setup parts of the module level build.xml files. I sure haven't figured
> out a clue of a way to reduce this, but if it could be done, it might
make
> the files a little less intimidating. In light of the vast improvement
> over the preceding build "system", this is a hardly visible quibble.
>
> david jencks
>
> On 2001.11.20 16:43:07 -0500 Jason Dillon wrote:
> > Please let me know if you think that the build system is too
complicated,
> > or
> > if there is some part of the system which is too complicated.
> >
> > --jason
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Unsubscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Archive: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jboss-docs/
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
> Universal Inkjet Refill Kit $29.95
> Refill any ink cartridge for less!
> Includes black and color ink.
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/Vv.L9D/MkNDAA/ySSFAA/9rHolB/TM
> -~->
>
> ---
> Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Unsubscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Archive: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jboss-docs/
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
___
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
___
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is the build system too complicated?
The executable bit is set on tools/bin/ant. Why dosen't your cvs client set
it when you check it out?
--jason
On Wed, 21 Nov 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I do have a slightly off-topic gripe -- as of late, (in the rh snapshots),
> jboss-all/tools/bin/ant has not been executable on UNIX systems (took my
> little mind a while to figure out what was going on). The
> jboss-all/build/build.sh script has been failing because of it. It looks
> for an executable 'ant', but never finds it (it doesn't have the
> executable bit set). I can see three possible solutions:
>
> 1. Just have the executable bit set on the ant script to start with
> 2. Change the search() function in build.sh to read like this:
>
> search() {
> search="$*"
> for d in $search; do
> ANT_HOME="`pwd`/$d"
> ANT="$ANT_HOME/bin/ant"
> # -- Begin modifications
> # If the file exists at all, attempt to add the executable bit
> if [ -e "$ANT" ]; then
> `chmod +x $ANT`
> fi
> # -- End modifications
> if [ -x "$ANT" ]; then
> # found one
> echo $ANT_HOME
> break
> fi
> done
> }
> #(just added a -e test to see if the file exists, and attempt to make it
> executable so that the next -x test works)
>
> 3. Skip looking for an executable ant script -- just make sure it exists,
> and call it with 'sh ant'.
>
> -jason
>
>
>
>
>
> Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 11/20/2001 09:38 PM
>
>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject:[JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is the build system too
>complicated?
>
>
>
> I have not found an easy way to provide this common setup/initialization
> stuff as a resource. Perhaps if I could tell the JAXP parser to read a
> resource file when parsing this could be done, but that would require the
> Ant entity hooks to be installed to handle that.
>
> Perhaps they have done that, perhaps I could sway them todo it... though
> my
> previous attempts to do so has failed (too much *ucking voting).
>
> If you can think of a way please let me know.
>
> Thanks for your feedback!
>
> --jason
>
>
> On Tue, 20 Nov 2001, David Jencks wrote:
>
> > It has often seemed to me that there is substantial duplication between
> the
> > setup parts of the module level build.xml files. I sure haven't figured
> > out a clue of a way to reduce this, but if it could be done, it might
> make
> > the files a little less intimidating. In light of the vast improvement
> > over the preceding build "system", this is a hardly visible quibble.
> >
> > david jencks
> >
> > On 2001.11.20 16:43:07 -0500 Jason Dillon wrote:
> > > Please let me know if you think that the build system is too
> complicated,
> > > or
> > > if there is some part of the system which is too complicated.
> > >
> > > --jason
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Unsubscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Archive: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jboss-docs/
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
> > Universal Inkjet Refill Kit $29.95
> > Refill any ink cartridge for less!
> > Includes black and color ink.
> > http://us.click.yahoo.com/Vv.L9D/MkNDAA/ySSFAA/9rHolB/TM
> > -~->
> >
> > ---
> > Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Unsubscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Archive: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jboss-docs/
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
>
>
> ___
> Jboss-development mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
>
>
>
___
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is the build system too complicated?
Unfortunately, my firewall currently doesn't let me check out via cvs
directly unless it's over ssh, and I don't have RW access to the
repository (yet :) -- I've been downloading the nightly snapshots (ugh)
in .tgz form from http://www.jboss.org/snapshots/. When I untar that, the
executable bit is not set.(using gnu tar and gzip on linux with the
command 'tar -xzvf jboss-all.tgz`) Actually, from a few spot checks, it
looks as if everything comes out '-rw-r--r--', including build.sh itself.
Yes, I've tried using the -p option with tar to extract permissions
information -- no effect (I think that's the default anyway, though I'm
not sure)
-jason
Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11/21/2001 02:09 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is the build system too
complicated?
The executable bit is set on tools/bin/ant. Why dosen't your cvs client
set
it when you check it out?
--jason
On Wed, 21 Nov 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I do have a slightly off-topic gripe -- as of late, (in the rh
snapshots),
> jboss-all/tools/bin/ant has not been executable on UNIX systems (took my
> little mind a while to figure out what was going on). The
> jboss-all/build/build.sh script has been failing because of it. It
looks
> for an executable 'ant', but never finds it (it doesn't have the
> executable bit set). I can see three possible solutions:
>
> 1. Just have the executable bit set on the ant script to start with
> 2. Change the search() function in build.sh to read like this:
>
> search() {
> search="$*"
> for d in $search; do
> ANT_HOME="`pwd`/$d"
> ANT="$ANT_HOME/bin/ant"
> # -- Begin modifications
> # If the file exists at all, attempt to add the executable bit
> if [ -e "$ANT" ]; then
> `chmod +x $ANT`
> fi
> # -- End modifications
> if [ -x "$ANT" ]; then
> # found one
> echo $ANT_HOME
> break
> fi
> done
> }
> #(just added a -e test to see if the file exists, and attempt to make it
> executable so that the next -x test works)
>
> 3. Skip looking for an executable ant script -- just make sure it
exists,
> and call it with 'sh ant'.
>
> -jason
>
>
>
>
>
> Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 11/20/2001 09:38 PM
>
>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject:[JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is the build system
too complicated?
>
>
>
> I have not found an easy way to provide this common setup/initialization
> stuff as a resource. Perhaps if I could tell the JAXP parser to read a
> resource file when parsing this could be done, but that would require
the
> Ant entity hooks to be installed to handle that.
>
> Perhaps they have done that, perhaps I could sway them todo it... though
> my
> previous attempts to do so has failed (too much *ucking voting).
>
> If you can think of a way please let me know.
>
> Thanks for your feedback!
>
> --jason
>
>
> On Tue, 20 Nov 2001, David Jencks wrote:
>
> > It has often seemed to me that there is substantial duplication
between
> the
> > setup parts of the module level build.xml files. I sure haven't
figured
> > out a clue of a way to reduce this, but if it could be done, it might
> make
> > the files a little less intimidating. In light of the vast
improvement
> > over the preceding build "system", this is a hardly visible quibble.
> >
> > david jencks
> >
> > On 2001.11.20 16:43:07 -0500 Jason Dillon wrote:
> > > Please let me know if you think that the build system is too
> complicated,
> > > or
> > > if there is some part of the system which is too complicated.
> > >
> > > --jason
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Unsubscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Archive: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jboss-docs/
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
-~-->
> > Universal Inkjet Refill Kit $29.95
Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is the build system too complicated?
I see. Let me see if I can fix the snapshots, else I will fix build.sh.
--jason
On Wed, 21 Nov 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Unfortunately, my firewall currently doesn't let me check out via cvs
> directly unless it's over ssh, and I don't have RW access to the
> repository (yet :) -- I've been downloading the nightly snapshots (ugh)
> in .tgz form from http://www.jboss.org/snapshots/. When I untar that, the
> executable bit is not set.(using gnu tar and gzip on linux with the
> command 'tar -xzvf jboss-all.tgz`) Actually, from a few spot checks, it
> looks as if everything comes out '-rw-r--r--', including build.sh itself.
> Yes, I've tried using the -p option with tar to extract permissions
> information -- no effect (I think that's the default anyway, though I'm
> not sure)
>
> -jason
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 11/21/2001 02:09 PM
>
>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject:Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is the build system too
>complicated?
>
>
>
> The executable bit is set on tools/bin/ant. Why dosen't your cvs client
> set
> it when you check it out?
>
> --jason
>
>
> On Wed, 21 Nov 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > I do have a slightly off-topic gripe -- as of late, (in the rh
> snapshots),
> > jboss-all/tools/bin/ant has not been executable on UNIX systems (took my
>
> > little mind a while to figure out what was going on). The
> > jboss-all/build/build.sh script has been failing because of it. It
> looks
> > for an executable 'ant', but never finds it (it doesn't have the
> > executable bit set). I can see three possible solutions:
> >
> > 1. Just have the executable bit set on the ant script to start with
> > 2. Change the search() function in build.sh to read like this:
> >
> > search() {
> > search="$*"
> > for d in $search; do
> > ANT_HOME="`pwd`/$d"
> > ANT="$ANT_HOME/bin/ant"
> > # -- Begin modifications
> > # If the file exists at all, attempt to add the executable bit
> > if [ -e "$ANT" ]; then
> > `chmod +x $ANT`
> > fi
> > # -- End modifications
> > if [ -x "$ANT" ]; then
> > # found one
> > echo $ANT_HOME
> > break
> > fi
> > done
> > }
> > #(just added a -e test to see if the file exists, and attempt to make it
>
> > executable so that the next -x test works)
> >
> > 3. Skip looking for an executable ant script -- just make sure it
> exists,
> > and call it with 'sh ant'.
> >
> > -jason
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 11/20/2001 09:38 PM
> >
> >
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject:[JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is the build system
> too complicated?
> >
> >
> >
> > I have not found an easy way to provide this common setup/initialization
>
> > stuff as a resource. Perhaps if I could tell the JAXP parser to read a
> > resource file when parsing this could be done, but that would require
> the
> > Ant entity hooks to be installed to handle that.
> >
> > Perhaps they have done that, perhaps I could sway them todo it... though
>
> > my
> > previous attempts to do so has failed (too much *ucking voting).
> >
> > If you can think of a way please let me know.
> >
> > Thanks for your feedback!
> >
> > --jason
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 20 Nov 2001, David Jencks wrote:
> >
> > > It has often seemed to me that there is substantial duplication
> between
> > the
> > > setup parts of the module level build.xml files. I sure haven't
> figured
> > > out a clue of a way to reduce this, but if it could be done, it might
> > make
> > > the files a little less intimidating. In light of the vast
> improvement
> > > over the preceding build "system", this is a hardly visible quibble.
> > >
> > > david jencks
> > >
> > > On 2001.11.20 16:43:07 -0500 Jason Dillon wrote:
> > > >
Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is the build system too complicated?
java really pisses me off sometimes. why can't you get file perms from a
given platform? all of this platform independence has really dumbed down
the file access apis, too much in my oppinon.
it appears that there is noway with the vanilla jdk to check if a file is
executable... which is really *ucking stupid if you ask me... but since you
didn't well I am telling you anyways. Afterall who would want to execute a
file from Java? Whatever, where do they find the people that design this
crap.
Anyways, I have HACKED the build file to make all 'build.sh' and
'tools/bin/ant[Run]' files executable. I don't really like it, but don't
have much choice. Thanks SUN!
* * *
Let me know if this fixes your problem, should be ready early tomorrow
morning on the website.
--jason
On Wed, 21 Nov 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Unfortunately, my firewall currently doesn't let me check out via cvs
> directly unless it's over ssh, and I don't have RW access to the
> repository (yet :) -- I've been downloading the nightly snapshots (ugh)
> in .tgz form from http://www.jboss.org/snapshots/. When I untar that, the
> executable bit is not set.(using gnu tar and gzip on linux with the
> command 'tar -xzvf jboss-all.tgz`) Actually, from a few spot checks, it
> looks as if everything comes out '-rw-r--r--', including build.sh itself.
> Yes, I've tried using the -p option with tar to extract permissions
> information -- no effect (I think that's the default anyway, though I'm
> not sure)
>
> -jason
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 11/21/2001 02:09 PM
>
>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject:Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is the build system too
>complicated?
>
>
>
> The executable bit is set on tools/bin/ant. Why dosen't your cvs client
> set
> it when you check it out?
>
> --jason
>
>
> On Wed, 21 Nov 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > I do have a slightly off-topic gripe -- as of late, (in the rh
> snapshots),
> > jboss-all/tools/bin/ant has not been executable on UNIX systems (took my
>
> > little mind a while to figure out what was going on). The
> > jboss-all/build/build.sh script has been failing because of it. It
> looks
> > for an executable 'ant', but never finds it (it doesn't have the
> > executable bit set). I can see three possible solutions:
> >
> > 1. Just have the executable bit set on the ant script to start with
> > 2. Change the search() function in build.sh to read like this:
> >
> > search() {
> > search="$*"
> > for d in $search; do
> > ANT_HOME="`pwd`/$d"
> > ANT="$ANT_HOME/bin/ant"
> > # -- Begin modifications
> > # If the file exists at all, attempt to add the executable bit
> > if [ -e "$ANT" ]; then
> > `chmod +x $ANT`
> > fi
> > # -- End modifications
> > if [ -x "$ANT" ]; then
> > # found one
> > echo $ANT_HOME
> > break
> > fi
> > done
> > }
> > #(just added a -e test to see if the file exists, and attempt to make it
>
> > executable so that the next -x test works)
> >
> > 3. Skip looking for an executable ant script -- just make sure it
> exists,
> > and call it with 'sh ant'.
> >
> > -jason
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 11/20/2001 09:38 PM
> >
> >
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject:[JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is the build system
> too complicated?
> >
> >
> >
> > I have not found an easy way to provide this common setup/initialization
>
> > stuff as a resource. Perhaps if I could tell the JAXP parser to read a
> > resource file when parsing this could be done, but that would require
> the
> > Ant entity hooks to be installed to handle that.
> >
> > Perhaps they have done that, perhaps I could sway them todo it... though
>
> > my
> > previous attempts to do so has failed (too much *ucking voting).
> >
> > If you can think of a way please let me know.
> >
> > Thanks for your feedback!
> >
> > --jason
> >
>
Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is the build system too complicated?
On Wed, 21 Nov 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Unfortunately, my firewall currently doesn't let me check out via cvs > directly unless it's over ssh, and I don't have RW access to the > repository (yet :) -- I've been downloading the nightly snapshots (ugh) > in .tgz form from http://www.jboss.org/snapshots/. When I untar that, the > executable bit is not set.(using gnu tar and gzip on linux with the > command 'tar -xzvf jboss-all.tgz`) Actually, from a few spot checks, it > looks as if everything comes out '-rw-r--r--', including build.sh itself. > Yes, I've tried using the -p option with tar to extract permissions > information -- no effect (I think that's the default anyway, though I'm > not sure) http://kitenet.net/programs/sshcvs/ CVS over anonymous ssh. ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
RE: [JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is the build system too complicated?
I think you can use cvs over ssh to down load the code even if you don't
have rw. All you would need is a sourceforge shell account, and I think you
get one just by signing up for a sf user account. I'm not completely sure
but I would try.
-dain
> -Original Message-
> From: Jason Dillon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 1:44 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is the build system too
> complicated?
>
>
> I see. Let me see if I can fix the snapshots, else I will
> fix build.sh.
>
> --jason
>
>
> On Wed, 21 Nov 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Unfortunately, my firewall currently doesn't let me check
> out via cvs
> > directly unless it's over ssh, and I don't have RW access to the
> > repository (yet :) -- I've been downloading the nightly
> snapshots (ugh)
> > in .tgz form from http://www.jboss.org/snapshots/. When I
> untar that, the
> > executable bit is not set.(using gnu tar and gzip on
> linux with the
> > command 'tar -xzvf jboss-all.tgz`) Actually, from a few
> spot checks, it
> > looks as if everything comes out '-rw-r--r--', including
> build.sh itself.
> > Yes, I've tried using the -p option with tar to extract permissions
> > information -- no effect (I think that's the default
> anyway, though I'm
> > not sure)
> >
> > -jason
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > 11/21/2001 02:09 PM
> >
> >
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject:Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is
> the build system too complicated?
> >
> >
> >
> > The executable bit is set on tools/bin/ant. Why dosen't
> your cvs client
> > set
> > it when you check it out?
> >
> > --jason
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 21 Nov 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > I do have a slightly off-topic gripe -- as of late, (in the rh
> > snapshots),
> > > jboss-all/tools/bin/ant has not been executable on UNIX
> systems (took my
> >
> > > little mind a while to figure out what was going on). The
> > > jboss-all/build/build.sh script has been failing because
> of it. It
> > looks
> > > for an executable 'ant', but never finds it (it doesn't have the
> > > executable bit set). I can see three possible solutions:
> > >
> > > 1. Just have the executable bit set on the ant script to
> start with
> > > 2. Change the search() function in build.sh to read like this:
> > >
> > > search() {
> > > search="$*"
> > > for d in $search; do
> > > ANT_HOME="`pwd`/$d"
> > > ANT="$ANT_HOME/bin/ant"
> > > # -- Begin modifications
> > > # If the file exists at all, attempt to add the
> executable bit
> > > if [ -e "$ANT" ]; then
> > > `chmod +x $ANT`
> > > fi
> > > # -- End modifications
> > > if [ -x "$ANT" ]; then
> > > # found one
> > > echo $ANT_HOME
> > > break
> > > fi
> > > done
> > > }
> > > #(just added a -e test to see if the file exists, and
> attempt to make it
> >
> > > executable so that the next -x test works)
> > >
> > > 3. Skip looking for an executable ant script -- just make sure it
> > exists,
> > > and call it with 'sh ant'.
> > >
> > > -jason
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 11/20/2001 09:38 PM
> > >
> > >
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject:[JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is
> the build system
> > too complicated?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I have not found an easy way to provide this common
> setup/initialization
> >
> > > stuff as a resource. Perhaps if I could tell the JAXP
> parser to read a
> > > resource file when parsing this could be done, but that
> would require
> >
RE: [JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is the build system too complicated?
> java really pisses me off sometimes. why can't you get file
> perms from a
> given platform? all of this platform independence has really
> dumbed down
> the file access apis, too much in my oppinon.
I think you can with 1.4
>
> it appears that there is noway with the vanilla jdk to check
> if a file is
> executable... which is really *ucking stupid if you ask me...
> but since you
> didn't well I am telling you anyways. Afterall who would
> want to execute a
> file from Java? Whatever, where do they find the people that
> design this
> crap.
>
Doesn't ant have a chmod task.
>
> Anyways, I have HACKED the build file to make all 'build.sh' and
> 'tools/bin/ant[Run]' files executable. I don't really like
> it, but don't
> have much choice. Thanks SUN!
>
> * * *
>
> Let me know if this fixes your problem, should be ready early
> tomorrow
> morning on the website.
>
> --jason
>
>
> On Wed, 21 Nov 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Unfortunately, my firewall currently doesn't let me check
> out via cvs
> > directly unless it's over ssh, and I don't have RW access to the
> > repository (yet :) -- I've been downloading the nightly
> snapshots (ugh)
> > in .tgz form from http://www.jboss.org/snapshots/. When I
> untar that, the
> > executable bit is not set.(using gnu tar and gzip on
> linux with the
> > command 'tar -xzvf jboss-all.tgz`) Actually, from a few
> spot checks, it
> > looks as if everything comes out '-rw-r--r--', including
> build.sh itself.
> > Yes, I've tried using the -p option with tar to extract permissions
> > information -- no effect (I think that's the default
> anyway, though I'm
> > not sure)
> >
> > -jason
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > 11/21/2001 02:09 PM
> >
> >
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject:Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is
> the build system too complicated?
> >
> >
> >
> > The executable bit is set on tools/bin/ant. Why dosen't
> your cvs client
> > set
> > it when you check it out?
> >
> > --jason
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 21 Nov 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > I do have a slightly off-topic gripe -- as of late, (in the rh
> > snapshots),
> > > jboss-all/tools/bin/ant has not been executable on UNIX
> systems (took my
> >
> > > little mind a while to figure out what was going on). The
> > > jboss-all/build/build.sh script has been failing because
> of it. It
> > looks
> > > for an executable 'ant', but never finds it (it doesn't have the
> > > executable bit set). I can see three possible solutions:
> > >
> > > 1. Just have the executable bit set on the ant script to
> start with
> > > 2. Change the search() function in build.sh to read like this:
> > >
> > > search() {
> > > search="$*"
> > > for d in $search; do
> > > ANT_HOME="`pwd`/$d"
> > > ANT="$ANT_HOME/bin/ant"
> > > # -- Begin modifications
> > > # If the file exists at all, attempt to add the
> executable bit
> > > if [ -e "$ANT" ]; then
> > > `chmod +x $ANT`
> > > fi
> > > # -- End modifications ----
> > > if [ -x "$ANT" ]; then
> > > # found one
> > > echo $ANT_HOME
> > > break
> > > fi
> > > done
> > > }
> > > #(just added a -e test to see if the file exists, and
> attempt to make it
> >
> > > executable so that the next -x test works)
> > >
> > > 3. Skip looking for an executable ant script -- just make sure it
> > exists,
> > > and call it with 'sh ant'.
> > >
> > > -jason
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 11/20/2001 09:38 PM
> > >
> > >
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject:[JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-do
RE: [JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is the build system too complicated?
On Wed, 21 Nov 2001, Dain Sundstrom wrote: > > java really pisses me off sometimes. why can't you get file > > perms from a > > given platform? all of this platform independence has really > > dumbed down > > the file access apis, too much in my oppinon. > > I think you can with 1.4 That would be nice. I will have to look over the changes again. > > > > it appears that there is noway with the vanilla jdk to check > > if a file is > > executable... which is really *ucking stupid if you ask me... > > but since you > > didn't well I am telling you anyways. Afterall who would > > want to execute a > > file from Java? Whatever, where do they find the people that > > design this > > crap. > > > > Doesn't ant have a chmod task. It does, but it is dependent on executing the `chmod` program. We use it to setup the perms for scripts in the output directory. Chmod in this case won't help since once we tar (or zip) up the directory those bits will be lost. --jason ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is the build system too complicated?
Have you had any luck getting this to work with sourceforge? It appears that it requires a little different setup serverside -jason Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/21/2001 07:41 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is the build system too complicated? On Wed, 21 Nov 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Unfortunately, my firewall currently doesn't let me check out via cvs > directly unless it's over ssh, and I don't have RW access to the > repository (yet :) -- I've been downloading the nightly snapshots (ugh) > in .tgz form from http://www.jboss.org/snapshots/. When I untar that, the > executable bit is not set.(using gnu tar and gzip on linux with the > command 'tar -xzvf jboss-all.tgz`) Actually, from a few spot checks, it > looks as if everything comes out '-rw-r--r--', including build.sh itself. > Yes, I've tried using the -p option with tar to extract permissions > information -- no effect (I think that's the default anyway, though I'm > not sure) http://kitenet.net/programs/sshcvs/ CVS over anonymous ssh. ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [jboss-docs] Is the build system too complicated?
On Sun, 25 Nov 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Have you had any luck getting this to work with sourceforge? It appears > that it requires a little different setup serverside > > -jason > [snip] > > http://kitenet.net/programs/sshcvs/ > > CVS over anonymous ssh. No, haven't tried. The main problem is that it requires a separate system user, for the ~/.ssh/authorized_key stuff. ___ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
