can you look in karaf-framework-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT.kar ? jar tf assemblies/features/framework/target/karaf-framework-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT.kar |grep bin resources/bin/ resources/lib/bin/ resources/bin/admin resources/bin/admin.bat resources/bin/client resources/bin/client.bat resources/bin/karaf resources/bin/karaf.bat resources/bin/shell resources/bin/shell.bat resources/bin/start resources/bin/start.bat resources/bin/stop resources/bin/stop.bat resources/lib/bin/karaf-client.jar
thanks david jencks On Apr 11, 2011, at 3:00 PM, Achim Nierbeck wrote: > Hi, > > just did an update to the latest version in svn. > Build with clean install, but I still don't see any bin folder > > <moz-screenshot-5.png> > > > building on windows. > > regards, Achim > >> Hi, >> >> Looking back at my original message I might not have said quite what I >> thought I said... I know there are some gaps between new and old >> assemblies, and I was trying to start a discussion about them rather than >> suggest replacing the old with the current state of the new. >> >> I know the legal files and release notes are missing and need to be there, >> and hope to have a flexible solution soon. >> >> I'm wondering if I misunderstand you or if we are getting different build >> results. The bin directories are in all the new assemblies I build, with >> all the scripts (unix and windows) in both zip and tar.gz. The unix scripts >> in tar.gz have executable permissions and I can at least run bin/karaf. I >> have no way to test the windows scripts. e.g. >> >> jar tf target/apache-karaf-full-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT-bin.zip |grep bin >> apache-karaf-full-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT/bin/ >> apache-karaf-full-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT/lib/bin/ >> apache-karaf-full-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT/bin/admin >> apache-karaf-full-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT/bin/admin.bat >> apache-karaf-full-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT/bin/client >> apache-karaf-full-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT/bin/client.bat >> apache-karaf-full-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT/bin/karaf >> apache-karaf-full-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT/bin/karaf.bat >> apache-karaf-full-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT/bin/shell >> apache-karaf-full-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT/bin/shell.bat >> apache-karaf-full-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT/bin/start >> apache-karaf-full-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT/bin/start.bat >> apache-karaf-full-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT/bin/stop >> apache-karaf-full-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT/bin/stop.bat >> apache-karaf-full-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT/lib/bin/karaf-client.jar >> >> If this is not what you get.... what maven version are you using? I thought >> I set the minimum to 3.0.3 >> >> I agree that it would be better to name apache-karaf-full apache-karaf but >> don't think we can until we remove the old assembly. >> >> I believe these features files are in the old assemblies at these same >> locations: >> ./org/apache/karaf/assemblies/features/enterprise/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT/enterprise-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT-features.xml >> ./org/apache/karaf/assemblies/features/standard/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT/standard-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT-features.xml >> and are needed so the features in these feature repos are available. >> >> The other two are artifacts of assembling the server from the kar files that >> include the features files. If you think it's important I can make it so >> they aren't included but so far I've found them useful to check on the >> source of the entries in the generated startup.properties file. >> >> >> Hopefully we can figure out what's going on with the bin folder quickly... >> >> thanks >> david jencks >> >> On Apr 11, 2011, at 12:53 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: >> >>> Hi David, >>> >>> I take a quick look on apache karaf (minimal and full) assemblies generated >>> with >>> the new MOJOs. >>> >>> I see the following issues: >>> - no information files are presents in the assemblies: README, NOTICE, >>> LICENSE, >>> RELEASE-NOTES >>> - no bin folder containing the startup scripts >>> - I think that the apache-karaf-full should be named apache-karaf, I'm >>> afraid to >>> loose the users the the full suffix. >>> - could you explain the function of all features files in system repo ? >>> system$ find . -name "*.xml" >>> ./org/apache/karaf/assemblies/features/enterprise/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT/enterprise-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT-features.xml >>> ./org/apache/karaf/assemblies/features/standard/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT/standard-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT-features.xml >>> ./org/apache/karaf/assemblies/features/karaf-full/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT/karaf-full-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT-features.xml >>> ./org/apache/karaf/assemblies/features/karaf-framework/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT/karaf-framework-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT-features.xml >>> >>> So in the current state, the new assemblies can not replace the "old" one. >>> >>> The bin folder is a must have, also the README, NOTICE, etc. >>> >>> To summarize, here's my -1 to remove the "old" assembly for now. >>> >>> Regards >>> JB >>> >>> On Mon 11/04/11 07:42, "David Jencks" [email protected] wrote: >>>> I also added a simple karaf-feature-archetype. >>>> >>>> david jencks >>>> >>>> On Apr 10, 2011, at 2:38 PM, David Jencks wrote: >>>> >>>>> I didn't see where a smx assembly was being built so >>>> I spent a few minutes on plugin documentation. I think running mvn site in >>>> tooling/karaf-maven-plugin produces a reasonably informative >>>> result. >>>> >>>>> Are we publishing maven generated sites anywhere? >>>> I'm not always sure about regular projects' maven sites but the generated >>>> plugin documentation is usually pretty useful and I think that people >>>> expect to find it. >>>> >>>>> thanks >>>>> david jencks >>>>> >>>>> On Apr 9, 2011, at 1:47 PM, Achim Nierbeck >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>> my comments in-line :) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> I think I left out a step :-) and I'm not >>>> sure how people are currently packaging the extra files needed for a custom >>>> server. >>>>>> the way I used to do it was to configure a maven >>>> project for assembly >>>>> and I configured all my extra bundles as >>>> dependency in this >>>>> project, using the assembly plug-in for maven. >>>> First step was to extract >>>>> the standard distro of Karaf, add some extra >>>> bundles >>>>> add some extra config files, changed some config >>>> files skipped some >>>>> config files of the original >>>> assembly. >>>>>>> I'm thinking that you would set up a kar >>>> project with all the extra files, configuration, etc as well as listing or >>>> including the bundles, so you can install e.g. servicemix on any karaf >>>> instance as a kar, and then also set up a karaf-assembly project that >>>> produces a custom distribution based on that kar as well as everything else >>>> you want in the server. >>>>>> This is a nice idea, and this way I probably >>>> don't need to edit the >>>>> startup.properties anymore. I kind of like >>>> that. >>>>> As I already stated we need some very good >>>> documentation to get our >>>>> users into this boat :) >>>>>>> The framework and full kars I added to >>>> assemblies/features combined with the new assemblies are one example of >>>> this technique, but maybe I should try it out on e.g. servicemix also as an >>>> example. Is it clear where the servicemix assembly is? >>>>>> For this you have to ask JB, he did the last >>>> release for ServiceMix. >>>>>>> thanks >>>>>>> david jencks >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Apr 9, 2011, at 11:41 AM, Achim Nierbeck >>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi David, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I assume you are talking about the >>>> instructions for custom distributions here: >>>>>>>>> http://karaf.apache.org/manual/2.2.0/developers-guide/custom-di >>>> stribution.html >>>>>>>> yes, exactly >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The process described here is >>>> hideously complex compared to what I'm proposing. To keep it available we >>>> need to keep the add-features-to-repo mojo. If, after comparing equivalent >>>> old and new style karaf assembly projects, someone wants to keep it, >>>> fine. >>>>>>> well, it might be complex but most >>>> persons I know a very aware of how to >>>>>>> use the assembly plugin of maven on >>>> building a >>>>>>> nice little distribution :) >>>>>>>>> Conceptually the main difference I >>>> see between old and new styles is that the old style relies on unpacking an >>>> existing distro whereas the new style currently asks you to copy the list >>>> of features and kars that were assembled into the existing distro. I think >>>> I can set up an "uber feature" for each distro so there's only one feature >>>> going in, so in either style there would be exactly one artifact involved, >>>> but it might be a good idea to add an "unpack existing distro" mojo so the >>>> karaf-assembly packaging can also unpack something for you. In this case I >>>> think the new style would be equivalent to the old style except you'd list >>>> the features to add as maven dependencies instead of configuring them in >>>> the k-m-p plugin configuration, and you' leave out 99% of the >>>> configuration. >>>>>>>>> Have you tried setting up a project >>>> to do a new-style assembly? >>>>>>> No I didn't yet, but will give it a try. >>>> I just realized this big change. >>>>>>>> regards, Achim >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> thanks >>>>>>>>> david jencks >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Apr 9, 2011, at 10:03 AM, Achim >>>> Nierbeck wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Hi all my comments >>>> in-line >>>>>>>>>> regards, Achim >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Karaf is complete atomic and >>>> standalone OSGi container. >>>>>>>>>>> It should run by itself (and >>>> it's still the case). >>>>>>>>>> full ack, for just using camel >>>> you don't need anything else. This just >>>>>>>>> as a quick description on how I >>>> am using Karaf very often. >>>>>>>>>>> I think it's more logic for >>>> the projects to be build on top. Anyway, >>>>>>>>>> I'm not against this new >>>> change as it could get life easy in the project. >>>>>>>>>> David, did you launch a >>>> thread in the past on this mailing list, or >>>>>>>>>> updated a wiki page >>>> describing this new philosophy ? Sorry if the >>>>>>>>>> question is stupid, maybe I >>>> missed some messages, but I don't remember >>>>>>>>>> lot of discussion on these >>>> changes. >>>>>>>>>> I did see some mail-threads >>>> touching parts of this, but somehow I was >>>>>>>>> missing the big picture >>>> beforehand. >>>>>>>>> IMHO for me this move was quite >>>> fast and a better discussion could have >>>>>>>>> been helpful. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Let me make some try to have >>>> a better understanding. Anyway, I didn't >>>>>>>>>> see any change on the manual >>>> around the "Karaf Custom Distribution" >>>>>>>>>> section. It should be >>>> introduce and described in the manual. >>>>>>>>>> We surely need some very good >>>> documentation on this move, because we >>>>>>>>> already have a description for >>>> how to build a custom distributions and >>>>>>>>> people are already using it to >>>> make their own custom distribution. I >>>>>>>>> used to do this at my former >>>> company >>>>>>>>> and I'm sure the guys doing it >>>> now will get kind of upset if they have >>>>>>>>> to change a lot on how to make a >>>> custom distribution. >>>>>>>>> Just my 2 cent. >>>>>>>>>>> I will do that regarding my >>>> tests on ServiceMix. >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>>> JB >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 04/08/2011 09:15 PM, >>>> David Jencks wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to suggest that >>>> it would be more appropriate for other >>>>>>>>>>> projects such as >>>> servicemix to have one or more karaf-assembly >>>>>>>>>>> packaging projects >>>> similar to the apache-karaf-framework or >>>>>>>>>>> apache-karaf-full >>>> assemblies but including exactly the content >>>>>>>>>>> wanted, rather than >>>> starting with a distributed karaf server and >>>>>>>>>>> modifying it. That was >>>> more or less the point of introcuding the >>>>>>>>>>> karaf-assembly >>>> packaging. >>>>>>>>>>>> This is a pretty >>>> dramatic change in philosophy of what karaf is and >>>>>>>>>>> how to use it, but I >>>> think it is easier to use and a lot more >>>>>>>>>>> flexible. I think of >>>> karaf more as a way to construct servers rather >>>>>>>>>>> than as a particular set >>>> of content in a server. >>>>>>>>>>>> thanks >>>>>>>>>>>> david jencks >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 8, 2011, at 10:55 >>>> AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> Before, I will check >>>> the impact on some other projects, especially >>>>>>>>>>>> around the >>>> groupId/artifactId used. >>>>>>>>>>>>> We made a mistake by >>>> changing the groupId/artifactId of features, I >>>>>>>>>>>> don't wanna to have >>>> the same issue with the distribution assemblies. >>>>>>>>>>>> Projects like >>>> ServiceMix use the Karaf distribution in their own >>>>>>>>>>>> assembly. At least, >>>> we need to document the new Mojo, the new >>>>>>>>>>>> distro, >>>> etc. >>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm gonna make some >>>> tests with ServiceMix and I will keep you posted. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>>>>> JB >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 04/08/2011 07:45 >>>> PM, David Jencks wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to >>>> suggest that we remove the old assemblies/apache-karaf >>>>>>>>>>>>> and use instead >>>> the assemblies/apache-karaf-minimal and >>>> apache-karaf-full assemblies constructed using the new mojos. >>>> I >>>>>>>>>>>>> think we can >>>> also remove a lot of mojos from the karaf-maven-plugin. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> With the >>>> exception of some configuration files, legal files, the >>>>>>>>>>>>> demo files, and >>>> the inclusion of o.a.k.shell.ssh in the old minimal >>>>>>>>>>>>> assembly by >>>> error, the contents of the corresponding new and old >>>>>>>>>>>>> assemblies are >>>> the same. A few more bundles start in the newer >>>>>>>>>>>>> servers but I >>>> think these are errors similar to the inclusion of >>>>>>>>>>>>> ssh in the >>>> minimal assemblies. It would be great if someone more >>>>>>>>>>>>> familiar with >>>> karaf history than I would investigate the >>>>>>>>>>>>> differences and >>>> advise about what to do. Basically I assume that >>>>>>>>>>>>> all the bundles >>>> in system should be started, so the choices are to >>>>>>>>>>>>> remove the extra >>>> bundles from system or to decide that indeed their >>>>>>>>>>>>> presence is >>>> correct. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure >>>> what to do with the demos. It's easy enough to write >>>>>>>>>>>>> a kar file that >>>> will unpack the demo content so it will look just >>>>>>>>>>>>> as it does >>>> today, but what's there strikes me as sort of horrible. >>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't really >>>> expect a server image to include maven projects that >>>>>>>>>>>>> I can build to >>>> add functionality. I think that it would be a lot >>>>>>>>>>>>> more appropriate >>>> to have a customization maven archetype that will >>>>>>>>>>>>> generate a >>>> full-featured customization project, and one or two demo >>>>>>>>>>>>> features that >>>> can install prebuilt demo applications. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm thinking >>>> about how best to install legal files into assemblies >>>>>>>>>>>>> and hope to have >>>> a suggestion in the next few days. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The current >>>> apache-karaf builds some kind of source distribution. >>>>>>>>>>>>> I haven't looked >>>> into exactly what it is but suggest that the >>>>>>>>>>>>> source distros >>>> produced by the apache release profile are sufficient. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Related to this >>>> suggestion I think it would be great if some of the >>>>>>>>>>>>> other projects >>>> that use karaf such as servicemix, activemq, >>>>>>>>>>>>> directory (?) >>>> tried out the new packagings to build custom server >>>>>>>>>>>>> assemblies. I >>>> will try to write up some documentation and maven >>>>>>>>>>>>> archetypes for >>>> this in the next few days. >>>> thoughts? >>>> thanks >>>>>>>>>>>>> david >>>> jencks >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >
