Hi David,

sorry building on windows I don't have a bin folder contained in the kar
file you asked for.

regards, Achim

Am 12.04.2011 01:36, schrieb David Jencks:
> 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
>>>>>
>>>>>
>

Reply via email to