Monday, November 14, 2005, 7:33:51 PM CET, Andrew McIntyre wrote: > On Nov 14, 2005, at 9:00 AM, John Embretsen wrote:
>> has anyone tried to build the Derby jars based on the 10.1.2.1 (10.1.2 >> Release Candidate #2) source code archive? (We are supposed to be able >> to do this, right?) >> >> A google search led me to a thread in the mailing list archive of >> Apache >> Gump: http://tinyurl.com/742ln. >> It seems that Andrew has come across the same build error fairly >> recently, and that this is/was a subversion problem. >> >> So, Andrew, any ideas why this error appears when I try to build the >> jars based on the code from the 10.1.2.1 source archive? > Yes, there is a problem with svnversion in subversion 1.1.x and > earlier that causes an additional carriage return to be appended to > directories that are reported as 'exported', even when run with the - > n option. The property ${changenumber} which contains the version > reported by subversion then contains an additional carriage return, > which in turn breaks the manifest file format by setting the top- > level Sealed attribute apart from the rest of the top-level > attributes as you noted. > I checked in a fix to the trunk so that Gump could continue to run. > It's a rather simple patch, which you could apply to the build.xml > from the source distribution, attached to the end of this mail. Excellent, I tried your patch (i.e., I added the <striplinebreaks> filter reader to the top-level build.xml manually), and ant buildjars now works. > This problem has been fixed in Subversion 1.2.0 and above. Upgrading > to the latest subversion will also remedy the problem. For this > reason, I would consider it a non-showstopper for holding up the > 10.1.2.1 release, but I will merge the fix over to the 10.1 branch > for future releases. Yes, it would be unfortunate if this is considered a showstopper for the release (still, it is too bad I didn't try this while the vote was still active), but I have one question: I am using Subversion 1.1.4, but this should not matter in this case, should it? I mean, I guess it is the subversion version of the person doing the release packaging (in this case Kathey, right?) that matters, or am I misunderstanding something here? -- John > andrew > Index: build.xml > =================================================================== > --- build.xml (revision 330289) > +++ build.xml (revision 330290) > @@ -700,9 +700,13 @@ > <property name="derby.jar.topdir" value="${basedir}/jars"/> > <mkdir dir="${derby.jar.dir}"/> > <mkdir dir="${derby.jar.dir}/lists"/> > - <loadfile srcFile="${basedir}/changenumber.properties" > + <loadfile srcFile="${basedir}/changenumber.properties" > failonerror="false" > - property="changenumber"/> > + property="changenumber"> > + <filterchain> > + <striplinebreaks/> > + </filterchain> > + </loadfile> > <condition property="changenumber" value="???"> > <not> > <isset property="changenumber"/>
