On Sep 7, 2006, at 10:24 AM, David Jencks wrote:
I think that the current bootstrap behavior is necessary for the
reasons jason has stated however I think it should be named
something else so people who just want to build g. won't be tempted
to use it -- like
advanced-ultra-clean-build
or
I think that the current bootstrap behavior is necessary for the
reasons jason has stated however I think it should be named something
else so people who just want to build g. won't be tempted to use it
-- like
advanced-ultra-clean-build
or
bootstrap-with-new-mvn-repo
I would really like
I'm in favor of adding and advanced section to the docs ( on http://
cwiki.apache.org/GMOxDEV/building-apache-geronimo-with-maven-2.html )
--jason
On Sep 5, 2006, at 7:34 AM, Paul McMahan wrote:
I am in favor of keeping bootstrap around for automating the several
steps it takes to check out
I am in favor of keeping bootstrap around for automating the several
steps it takes to check out and build the server into one command. I
agree with Anita that there should be instructions for advanced users
on the wiki for building without bootstrap -- I have already found her
advice very helpfu
I give up trying to explain... do as you please.
--jason
On Sep 1, 2006, at 12:48 PM, anita kulshreshtha wrote:
inline..
--- Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sep 1, 2006, at 7:42 AM, anita kulshreshtha wrote:
Anita, why do you always bring this up when there is talk about
boot
inline..
--- Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sep 1, 2006, at 7:42 AM, anita kulshreshtha wrote:
> Anita, why do you always bring this up when there is talk about
> bootstrap?
Because when people are using bootstrap, it is not very obvious what
is going on. It is much simpler to
--- Jacek Laskowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/1/06, anita kulshreshtha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> >It appears that I am the only one who does not use the
> bootstrap.
>
> I'm not using it anymore once it's once been used as Jason suggested.
>
> > >mkdir geronimo
On Sep 1, 2006, at 7:49 AM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
Would you mind updating the jira issue
(http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2371) with your
instructions?
Can we not...
--jason
On Sep 1, 2006, at 7:42 AM, anita kulshreshtha wrote:
None of these are required. The *only* thing that needs to be
published is the car-maven-plugin. The only time one might(?) need to
use bootstrap is when releasing a new version of the plugin. The
plugin
must be released *only* in these
On 9/1/06, anita kulshreshtha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi All,
It appears that I am the only one who does not use the bootstrap.
I'm not using it anymore once it's once been used as Jason suggested.
>mkdir geronimo
>svn co https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/server/trunk
geron
Hi All,
It appears that I am the only one who does not use the bootstrap.
Here is why it is not needed...
--- Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No issue...
>
> * OpenEJB2 snaps need to be published by CI (needs G below)
> * G snaps to be published by CI (needs OpenEJB2 above)
>
ya... more issues :-P
Thanks :-)
--jason
On Aug 31, 2006, at 4:40 PM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
On 9/1/06, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
No issue...
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2371 "bootstrap script
removed as build helper tool"
Assignee: Jason Dillon
:-)
Jace
On 9/1/06, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
No issue...
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2371 "bootstrap script
removed as build helper tool"
Assignee: Jason Dillon
:-)
Jacek
--
Jacek Laskowski
http://www.laskowski.net.pl
No issue...
* OpenEJB2 snaps need to be published by CI (needs G below)
* G snaps to be published by CI (needs OpenEJB2 above)
* specs/trunk need to be published
* Maven needs to get MNG-1911 fixed
And then at that point bootstrap will not be needed for normal use...
may still want to keep
On 8/31/06, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You most certainly do not need to use it to build Geronimo. It is
only an attempt to automate several steps together. As I have said
before, and I will undoubtedly say again, bootstrap is temporary and
will be removed as soon as we have all o
On 8/31/06, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Um... then what does Perm stand for?
Permanent - it's not for GC to take care of. Once it's occupied, it
will stay as such forever, once jvm stops.
@see https://java.sun.com/docs/hotspot/gc5.0/gc_tuning_5.html (I think
I've read something nic
They are not part of standard GC, therefore permanent.
They are owned by their classloader, only if the classloader is
destroyed then the objects are dropped.
--heinz
On 8/31/06, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Um... then what does Perm stand for?
--jason
On Aug 30, 2006, at 11:24 PM
Um... then what does Perm stand for?
--jason
On Aug 30, 2006, at 11:24 PM, Heinz Drews wrote:
MaxPermSize specifies the amount of space used for class and method
objects.
Creating classes dynamically e.g. proxies, using cglib or other
dynamic byte code enhancers require more space than the
MaxPermSize specifies the amount of space used for class and method objects.
Creating classes dynamically e.g. proxies, using cglib or other
dynamic byte code enhancers require more space than the default.
The Sun document explicitly names JSP implementations as culprits for
running out of space.
I still dunno what -XXMaxPermSize does... will this wok on all
JVM's? Or is this just for windows.
I notice that someone updated the wiki to show this... I think we may
need to have an example for Windows and an example for others... as
I've never needed to set this... and it appears that
128m was sufficient.
--heinz
On 8/31/06, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What is the MaxPermSize you have set?
--jason
On Aug 30, 2006, at 10:49 PM, Heinz Drews wrote:
> If it would be my OS I would have enough money to produce a better
> one :-)
>
> In my case was jspc 1.4.5-SNAPSH
What is the MaxPermSize you have set?
--jason
On Aug 30, 2006, at 10:49 PM, Heinz Drews wrote:
If it would be my OS I would have enough money to produce a better
one :-)
In my case was jspc 1.4.5-SNAPSHOT and increasing MaxPermSize was
the remedy.
--Heinz
On 8/31/06, Jason Dillon <[EM
If it would be my OS I would have enough money to produce a better one :-)
In my case was jspc 1.4.5-SNAPSHOT and increasing MaxPermSize was the remedy.
--Heinz
On 8/31/06, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm not offended... well, not by your email at least... your os...
well that is a
I'm not offended... well, not by your email at least... your os...
well that is another story :-P
Hopefully we will have the magic recipe for building on windows soon.
--jason
On Aug 30, 2006, at 10:01 PM, Heinz Drews wrote:
Please don't see my comments as offense.
They are born from frust
Please don't see my comments as offense.
They are born from frustration. It seemed that build has been
promoted from being the way to being the destination.
For me it seems that setting MaxPermSize is helping a lot.
The situation that the total process stopped because of a failing test
has not h
To clarify... the move of the downloaded sources to target/external
was intended, as I did want to make sure that mvn clean removed
them. These sources are not intended to be modified by hand.
Anything that you end up having problems with need to make it back to
those repositories as chan
Running the steps by hand removes bootstrap, a convenience script,
from the equation.
You most certainly do not need to use it to build Geronimo. It is
only an attempt to automate several steps together. As I have said
before, and I will undoubtedly say again, bootstrap is temporary and
Jason,
running the steps individually does not change the situation, it only
gives better chances to see what has gone wrong. I also don't want to
clean my local Maven repos each time, it might sound strange but I
have also other stuff there and not the G related components.
bootstrap anyhow c
All of you guys who are seeing strange failures... I suggest you not
use bootstrap, but instead run the steps by hand.
--jason
On Aug 30, 2006, at 7:38 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
Jason,
I'm not sure if this was intended or not ... but having these
thirdparty items under target results in the so
Jason,
I'm not sure if this was intended or not ... but having these thirdparty
items under target results in the source being purged when doing an mvn
clean. This is unfortunate for those of us that are hitting the
failures on the openejb tests. My memory may not be correct but I
thought
30 matches
Mail list logo
