The problem still exists. I've opened a JIRA issue for that: MIME4J-231. Andreas
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Andreas Veithen <[email protected]> wrote: > Did somebody take a look at the issue described below? > > Andreas > > On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 10:22 PM, Andreas Veithen > <[email protected]> wrote: >> The issue still occurs randomly, even on Ubuntu. I investigated this a >> bit further, and I noticed the following. >> >> I inspected the logs of a build that produced an artifact without OSGi >> manifest and I saw this: >> >> [INFO] --- maven-bundle-plugin:2.3.7:bundle (default-bundle) @ >> apache-mime4j-core --- >> [INFO] >> [INFO] --- maven-jar-plugin:2.4:jar (jar) @ apache-mime4j-core --- >> [INFO] Building jar: >> /home/jenkins/jenkins-slave/workspace/mime4j-trunk/trunk/core/target/apache-mime4j-core-0.8.0-SNAPSHOT.jar >> [INFO] >> >> On the other hand, for one of the builds that was successful, the >> output is different: >> >> [INFO] --- maven-bundle-plugin:2.3.7:bundle (default-bundle) @ >> apache-mime4j-core --- >> [INFO] >> [INFO] --- maven-jar-plugin:2.4:jar (jar) @ apache-mime4j-core --- >> [INFO] >> >> Normally, there is an up-to-date check that should cause the >> maven-jar-plugin to skip the execution of the jar goal because >> maven-bundle-plugin already generated the JAR. It looks like for some >> unknown reason that up-to-date check is not deterministic, and >> sometimes maven-jar-plugin replaces the JAR generated by >> maven-bundle-plugin. In that case maven-jar-plugin generates its own >> MANIFEST.MF (which is expected) instead of using the manifest >> generated by maven-bundle-plugin. >> >> That being said, since the packaging of the project is "bundle", there >> actually shouldn't be any execution of the jar goal at all. It turns >> out that the execution is configured by the >> org.apache.james:james-project parent POM and that that configuration >> was added between 1.8.1 and 1.8.2. You switched that version in >> r1457430 (Sun Mar 17 12:08:05 2013), and this is indeed when the >> problems started. >> >> Can you temporarily revert that change so that we can confirm the >> analysis and check if it stabilizes the build? Once we confirm that >> the build becomes deterministic again with >> org.apache.james:james-project:1.8.1 you can check what modifications >> need to be done on the parent POM to avoid the issue. >> >> Andreas >> >> >> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Ioan Eugen Stan <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> Thank you Andreas for investigating the issue and reporting it. If >>> your changes do not fix the issue, maybe it would be wise to report >>> this to infra. >>> For some reason Jenkins builds are very problematic - they fail for a >>> lot of reasons unrelated to code. >>> >>> Please keep us posted if you get updates on this issue. >>> >>> Cheers,
