Yes , we should build & install jruby 1.6.8 from ibmsoe/jruby before building hbase on Power.
But the catch here is building jruby 1.6.8 with java 8 or ( java 7 version above 1.7.0.79 ) fails due to some changes in java which affects ruby objects.https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-4640 Thanks Ayappan P From: "MrAsanjar ." <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: 18-02-2016 19:44 Subject: Re: patching upstream source Thanks Ayappan, would you then remove the patch from HBase JIRA, it is confusing ;) Are you proposing, as it was done with leveldnjni, to build jruby 1.7.2 before HBase build on power? On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Ayappan P2 <[email protected]> wrote: > The patch attached in the HBASE-13338 jira won't fix the issue. I > attached the patch so that the community members can use it and experience > the same error which i got when i updated the jruby version to 1.7.20 > > Hbase 0.98.* or 1.1.* is not compatible with Jruby 1.7.20 and using it > will aggravate the problem . > > The hbase shell / jruby problem is similar to the leveldbjni problem faced > in ppc64le. > > We can take the same approach we took in the later case. > > Thanks > Ayappan P > > > > From: "MrAsanjar ." <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Date: 18-02-2016 18:05 > Subject: Re: patching upstream source > > > > Cos, I am firing myself now lol lol > I agree with you %100, we already have a patch made available to HBase > community trough JIRA https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-13338. > But you know how fast that works :) > > On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 1:53 AM, Konstantin Boudnik <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Understand, but it's all the same: build is the code. If somebody > working > > for > > you tells you otherwise - fire the guy: you're wasting your money on > that > > "professional". > > > > The best way to address the issue is to offer the patch to the upstream > > project. HBase community is quite responsive and we happen to have > Andrew > > on-board, who's IIRC the RM for 0.98.* line, so we have a good chance to > > get > > your changes in the next update. In the meanwhile, it'd be reasonable to > > monkey-patch the issue at Bigtop level. Then remove the patch > immediately > > once > > fixed release is incorporated to the stack. > > > > Regards, > > Cos > > > > On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 12:06AM, MrAsanjar . wrote: > > > Cos, I am refereeing to build and not source code changes. I would > like > > to > > > make changes to pom.xml. > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 11:49 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > There's no such option in the packaging code of our build system. > > Besides, > > > > we tend to be _extremely_ reluctant with upstream patching > > > > > > > > Cos > > > > > > > > On February 18, 2016 6:25:58 AM GMT+03:00, "MrAsanjar ." < > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > >I am following instructions define at > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/BIGTOP/Bigtop+Packaging > > to > > > > >apply a patch to upstream HBase source code. However, it is not > clear > > > > >if > > > > >there is an option for conditional patching. For example, apply the > > > > >patch > > > > >only if the platform is ppc64le. help please :) > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
