Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200
the other issue was wanting to enable cases where unpack200 was not in
the JRE but yet could be supplied separately.
Jeff
Andrew Niefer wrote:
As Pascal mentioned, when we first started experimenting with Pack200
we had memory problems. It seemed that Pack200's internal data was
static and not cleared between each jar that was packed. So once we
had packed a reasonable number of jars we started running out of memory.
It could be that we had been doing something wrong. It is also
possible that we could work around this by playing with class loaders
(under the assumption that if the classloader was garbage collected,
all that static memory would go away).
-Andrew
*Thomas Hallgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>*
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
01/25/2008 02:53 AM
Please respond to
Equinox development mailing list
To
Equinox development mailing list
cc
Subject
Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200
Just out of curiosity, why do you use the external binary to do the
pack/unpack and not the java.util.jar.Pack200 class? It seems to me that
a fragment that is EE dependent (require Java 1.5 or higher) would be
ideal here. Those who run lower then Java 5 simply would not have
pack200 which is kind of natural isn't it?
- thomas
Jeff McAffer wrote:
> right but there is the practical detail that the exe you need comes
> with Java 5 or later and the licensing does not likely allow you to
> ship just the unpack200 exe. But that is a matter for someone's legal
> team. As John says, the unpack support simply cares whether or not
> the exe is there.
> What we really need is an open source implementation of unpack that
> runs on/with Foundation...
>
> Jeff
>
>
> John Arthorne wrote:
>>
>> Just to clarify, the JRE level doesn't matter here. Unpack is
>> performed by a standalone unpack200 executable that doesn't require
>> presence of a JVM. You can run with a Foundation class library, plus
>> a standalone unpack200 executable from Java 5 or Java 6.
>>
>>
>>
>> *Jim Colson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>*
>> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> 01/24/2008 09:18 PM
>> Please respond to
>> Equinox development mailing list
>>
>>
>>
>> To
>> Equinox development mailing list
>> cc
>> Equinox development mailing list ,
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject
>> Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> how would that work on J2ME (CDC/Foundatoin)?
>>
>>
>>
>> Jim Colson, Chief Architect - IBM Client Software
>> Distinguished Engineer
>> IBM Academy of Technology
>> Board Member - IT Architect Certification
>>
>> 11501 Burnet Rd. Austin, TX 78758
>> Ph 512-823-7357, Fax 512-838-0962
>> email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> Admin: Sandra Wallis 512-838-3241
>> email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From:
>> Pascal Rapicault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>>
>> To:
>> Equinox development mailing list
>>
>>
>>
>> Date:
>> 01/24/2008 08:11 PM
>>
>>
>> Subject:
>> [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I seem to remember that someone was working on adding to support to our
>> download manager to favor downloading pack200'ed artifacts over
>> canonical
>> ones.
>> Did that ever made it into the code?
>>
>> Thx
>>
>> PaScaL
>>
>> ___
>> equinox-dev mailing list
>> equinox-dev@eclipse.org
>> https://dev.
Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200
I was thinking a new separate classloader containing just the Pack200 classes. We would still want to delegate to the bootclassloader for everything else. However, I doubt the Pack200 classes are by themselves in their own jar that we could just create a URLClassloader for. This was really just an idea and I haven't really thought very hard about the details :) -Andrew Thomas Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/25/2008 11:54 AM Please respond to Equinox development mailing list To Equinox development mailing list cc Subject Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200 If the Pack200 class is loaded from the VM then it will fall under the boot class loader. There is no way we can throw that class loader away. Are you suggesting that we could somehow load this class from an isolated class loader that is not connected to the boot class loader? Tom Andrew Niefer ---01/25/2008 09:57:39 AM---As Pascal mentioned, when we first started experimenting with Pack200 we had memory problems. It seemed that Pack200's interna From: Andrew Niefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Equinox development mailing list Date: 01/25/2008 09:57 AM Subject: Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200 As Pascal mentioned, when we first started experimenting with Pack200 we had memory problems. It seemed that Pack200's internal data was static and not cleared between each jar that was packed. So once we had packed a reasonable number of jars we started running out of memory. It could be that we had been doing something wrong. It is also possible that we could work around this by playing with class loaders (under the assumption that if the classloader was garbage collected, all that static memory would go away). -Andrew Thomas Hallgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/25/2008 02:53 AM Please respond to Equinox development mailing list To Equinox development mailing list cc Subject Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200 Just out of curiosity, why do you use the external binary to do the pack/unpack and not the java.util.jar.Pack200 class? It seems to me that a fragment that is EE dependent (require Java 1.5 or higher) would be ideal here. Those who run lower then Java 5 simply would not have pack200 which is kind of natural isn't it? - thomas Jeff McAffer wrote: > right but there is the practical detail that the exe you need comes > with Java 5 or later and the licensing does not likely allow you to > ship just the unpack200 exe. But that is a matter for someone's legal > team. As John says, the unpack support simply cares whether or not > the exe is there. > What we really need is an open source implementation of unpack that > runs on/with Foundation... > > Jeff > > > John Arthorne wrote: >> >> Just to clarify, the JRE level doesn't matter here. Unpack is >> performed by a standalone unpack200 executable that doesn't require >> presence of a JVM. You can run with a Foundation class library, plus >> a standalone unpack200 executable from Java 5 or Java 6. >> >> >> >> *Jim Colson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>* >> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> 01/24/2008 09:18 PM >> Please respond to >> Equinox development mailing list >> >> >> >> To >> Equinox development mailing list >> cc >> Equinox development mailing list , >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject >> Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> how would that work on J2ME (CDC/Foundatoin)? >> >> >> >> Jim Colson, Chief Architect - IBM Client Software >> Distinguished Engineer >> IBM Academy of Technology >> Board Member - IT Architect Certification >> >> 11501 Burnet Rd. Austin, TX 78758 >> Ph 512-823-7357, Fax 512-838-0962 >> email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> Admin: Sandra Wallis 512-838-3241 >> email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> >> >> From: >> Pascal Rapicault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> >> To: >> Equinox development mailing list >> >> >> >> Date: >> 01/24/2008 08:11 PM >> >> >> Subject: >> [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200 >> >> >> >> >> >>
Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200
If the Pack200 class is loaded from the VM then it will fall under the boot class loader. There is no way we can throw that class loader away. Are you suggesting that we could somehow load this class from an isolated class loader that is not connected to the boot class loader? Tom From: Andrew Niefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Equinox development mailing list Date: 01/25/2008 09:57 AM Subject: Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200 As Pascal mentioned, when we first started experimenting with Pack200 we had memory problems. It seemed that Pack200's internal data was static and not cleared between each jar that was packed. So once we had packed a reasonable number of jars we started running out of memory. It could be that we had been doing something wrong. It is also possible that we could work around this by playing with class loaders (under the assumption that if the classloader was garbage collected, all that static memory would go away). -Andrew Thomas Hallgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]To Equinox development mailing list 01/25/2008 02:53 AMcc Subject Please respond toRe: [equinox-dev] [prov] Equinox development mailing listDownload manager support for pack200 Just out of curiosity, why do you use the external binary to do the pack/unpack and not the java.util.jar.Pack200 class? It seems to me that a fragment that is EE dependent (require Java 1.5 or higher) would be ideal here. Those who run lower then Java 5 simply would not have pack200 which is kind of natural isn't it? - thomas Jeff McAffer wrote: > right but there is the practical detail that the exe you need comes > with Java 5 or later and the licensing does not likely allow you to > ship just the unpack200 exe. But that is a matter for someone's legal > team. As John says, the unpack support simply cares whether or not > the exe is there. > What we really need is an open source implementation of unpack that > runs on/with Foundation... > > Jeff > > > John Arthorne wrote: >> >> Just to clarify, the JRE level doesn't matter here. Unpack is >> performed by a standalone unpack200 executable that doesn't require >> presence of a JVM. You can run with a Foundation class library, plus >> a standalone unpack200 executable from Java 5 or Java 6. >> >> >> >> *Jim Colson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>* >> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> 01/24/2008 09:18 PM >> Please respond to >> Equinox development mailing list >> >> >> >> To >> Equinox development mailing list >> cc >> Equinox development mailing list , >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject >> Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> how would that work on J2ME (CDC/Foundatoin)? >> >> >> >> Jim Colson, Chief Architect - IBM Client Software >> Distinguished Engineer >> IBM Academy of Technology >> Board Member - IT Architect Certification >> >> 11501 Burnet Rd. Austin, TX 78758 >> Ph 512-823-7357, Fax 512-838-0962 >> email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> Admin: Sa
Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200
As Pascal mentioned, when we first started experimenting with Pack200 we had memory problems. It seemed that Pack200's internal data was static and not cleared between each jar that was packed. So once we had packed a reasonable number of jars we started running out of memory. It could be that we had been doing something wrong. It is also possible that we could work around this by playing with class loaders (under the assumption that if the classloader was garbage collected, all that static memory would go away). -Andrew Thomas Hallgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/25/2008 02:53 AM Please respond to Equinox development mailing list To Equinox development mailing list cc Subject Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200 Just out of curiosity, why do you use the external binary to do the pack/unpack and not the java.util.jar.Pack200 class? It seems to me that a fragment that is EE dependent (require Java 1.5 or higher) would be ideal here. Those who run lower then Java 5 simply would not have pack200 which is kind of natural isn't it? - thomas Jeff McAffer wrote: > right but there is the practical detail that the exe you need comes > with Java 5 or later and the licensing does not likely allow you to > ship just the unpack200 exe. But that is a matter for someone's legal > team. As John says, the unpack support simply cares whether or not > the exe is there. > What we really need is an open source implementation of unpack that > runs on/with Foundation... > > Jeff > > > John Arthorne wrote: >> >> Just to clarify, the JRE level doesn't matter here. Unpack is >> performed by a standalone unpack200 executable that doesn't require >> presence of a JVM. You can run with a Foundation class library, plus >> a standalone unpack200 executable from Java 5 or Java 6. >> >> >> >> *Jim Colson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>* >> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> 01/24/2008 09:18 PM >> Please respond to >> Equinox development mailing list >> >> >> >> To >> Equinox development mailing list >> cc >> Equinox development mailing list , >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject >> Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> how would that work on J2ME (CDC/Foundatoin)? >> >> >> >> Jim Colson, Chief Architect - IBM Client Software >> Distinguished Engineer >> IBM Academy of Technology >> Board Member - IT Architect Certification >> >> 11501 Burnet Rd. Austin, TX 78758 >> Ph 512-823-7357, Fax 512-838-0962 >> email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> Admin: Sandra Wallis 512-838-3241 >> email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> >> >> From: >> Pascal Rapicault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> >> To: >> Equinox development mailing list >> >> >> >> Date: >> 01/24/2008 08:11 PM >> >> >> Subject: >> [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> I seem to remember that someone was working on adding to support to our >> download manager to favor downloading pack200'ed artifacts over >> canonical >> ones. >> Did that ever made it into the code? >> >> Thx >> >> PaScaL >> >> ___ >> equinox-dev mailing list >> equinox-dev@eclipse.org >> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev >> >> >> ___ >> equinox-dev mailing list >> equinox-dev@eclipse.org >> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev >> >> >> >> ___ >> equinox-dev mailing list >> equinox-dev@eclipse.org >> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev >> > ___ > equinox-dev mailing list > equinox-dev@eclipse.org > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev ___ equinox-dev mailing list equinox-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev ___ equinox-dev mailing list equinox-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200
Also, when we started packing we have had notices memory leakage problems when we were using pack200 through the Java API. |> | From: | |> >| |Jeff McAffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | >| |> | To:| |> >| |Equinox development mailing list | >| |> | Date: | |> >| |01/24/2008 11:36 PM | >| |> | Subject: | |> >--------------------| |Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200 | >| right but there is the practical detail that the exe you need comes with Java 5 or later and the licensing does not likely allow you to ship just the unpack200 exe. But that is a matter for someone's legal team. As John says, the unpack support simply cares whether or not the exe is there. What we really need is an open source implementation of unpack that runs on/with Foundation... Jeff John Arthorne wrote: > > Just to clarify, the JRE level doesn't matter here. Unpack is > performed by a standalone unpack200 executable that doesn't require > presence of a JVM. You can run with a Foundation class library, plus > a standalone unpack200 executable from Java 5 or Java 6. > > > > *Jim Colson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>* > Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 01/24/2008 09:18 PM > Please respond to > Equinox development mailing list > > > > To >Equinox development mailing list > cc > Equinox development mailing list , > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject >Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200 > > > > > > > > > > how would that work on J2ME (CDC/Foundatoin)? > > > > Jim Colson, Chief Architect - IBM Client Software > Distinguished Engineer > IBM Academy of Technology > Board Member - IT Architect Certification > > 11501 Burnet Rd. Austin, TX 78758 > Ph 512-823-7357, Fax 512-838-0962 > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Admin: Sandra Wallis 512-838-3241 > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > From: Pascal Rapicault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > To: Equinox development mailing list > > > > > Date: 01/24/2008 08:11 PM > > > > Subject:[equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200 > > > > > > > > > > I seem to remember that someone was working on adding to support to our > download manager to favor downloading pack200'ed artifacts over canonical > ones. > Did that ever made it into the code? > > Thx > > PaScaL > > ___ > equinox-dev mailing list > equinox-dev@eclipse.org > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev > > > ___ > equinox-dev mailing list > equinox-dev@eclipse.org > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev > > > > ___ > equinox-dev mailing list > equinox-dev@eclipse.org > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev > ___ equinox-dev mailing list equinox-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev ___ equinox-dev mailing list equinox-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200
Just out of curiosity, why do you use the external binary to do the
pack/unpack and not the java.util.jar.Pack200 class? It seems to me that
a fragment that is EE dependent (require Java 1.5 or higher) would be
ideal here. Those who run lower then Java 5 simply would not have
pack200 which is kind of natural isn't it?
- thomas
Jeff McAffer wrote:
right but there is the practical detail that the exe you need comes
with Java 5 or later and the licensing does not likely allow you to
ship just the unpack200 exe. But that is a matter for someone's legal
team. As John says, the unpack support simply cares whether or not
the exe is there.
What we really need is an open source implementation of unpack that
runs on/with Foundation...
Jeff
John Arthorne wrote:
Just to clarify, the JRE level doesn't matter here. Unpack is
performed by a standalone unpack200 executable that doesn't require
presence of a JVM. You can run with a Foundation class library, plus
a standalone unpack200 executable from Java 5 or Java 6.
*Jim Colson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>*
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
01/24/2008 09:18 PM
Please respond to
Equinox development mailing list
To
Equinox development mailing list
cc
Equinox development mailing list ,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject
Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200
how would that work on J2ME (CDC/Foundatoin)?
Jim Colson, Chief Architect - IBM Client Software
Distinguished Engineer
IBM Academy of Technology
Board Member - IT Architect Certification
11501 Burnet Rd. Austin, TX 78758
Ph 512-823-7357, Fax 512-838-0962
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Admin: Sandra Wallis 512-838-3241
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From:
Pascal Rapicault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Equinox development mailing list
Date:
01/24/2008 08:11 PM
Subject:
[equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200
I seem to remember that someone was working on adding to support to our
download manager to favor downloading pack200'ed artifacts over
canonical
ones.
Did that ever made it into the code?
Thx
PaScaL
___
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev@eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
___
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev@eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
___
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev@eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
___
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev@eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
___
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev@eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200
right but there is the practical detail that the exe you need comes with
Java 5 or later and the licensing does not likely allow you to ship just
the unpack200 exe. But that is a matter for someone's legal team. As
John says, the unpack support simply cares whether or not the exe is
there.
What we really need is an open source implementation of unpack that runs
on/with Foundation...
Jeff
John Arthorne wrote:
Just to clarify, the JRE level doesn't matter here. Unpack is
performed by a standalone unpack200 executable that doesn't require
presence of a JVM. You can run with a Foundation class library, plus
a standalone unpack200 executable from Java 5 or Java 6.
*Jim Colson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>*
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
01/24/2008 09:18 PM
Please respond to
Equinox development mailing list
To
Equinox development mailing list
cc
Equinox development mailing list ,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject
Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200
how would that work on J2ME (CDC/Foundatoin)?
Jim Colson, Chief Architect - IBM Client Software
Distinguished Engineer
IBM Academy of Technology
Board Member - IT Architect Certification
11501 Burnet Rd. Austin, TX 78758
Ph 512-823-7357, Fax 512-838-0962
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Admin: Sandra Wallis 512-838-3241
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Pascal Rapicault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Equinox development mailing list
Date: 01/24/2008 08:11 PM
Subject:[equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200
I seem to remember that someone was working on adding to support to our
download manager to favor downloading pack200'ed artifacts over canonical
ones.
Did that ever made it into the code?
Thx
PaScaL
___
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev@eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
___
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev@eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
___
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev@eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
___
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev@eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200
Just to clarify, the JRE level doesn't matter here. Unpack is performed by a standalone unpack200 executable that doesn't require presence of a JVM. You can run with a Foundation class library, plus a standalone unpack200 executable from Java 5 or Java 6. Jim Colson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/24/2008 09:18 PM Please respond to Equinox development mailing list To Equinox development mailing list cc Equinox development mailing list , [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200 how would that work on J2ME (CDC/Foundatoin)? Jim Colson, Chief Architect - IBM Client Software Distinguished Engineer IBM Academy of Technology Board Member - IT Architect Certification 11501 Burnet Rd. Austin, TX 78758 Ph 512-823-7357, Fax 512-838-0962 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Admin: Sandra Wallis 512-838-3241 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Pascal Rapicault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Equinox development mailing list Date: 01/24/2008 08:11 PM Subject: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200 I seem to remember that someone was working on adding to support to our download manager to favor downloading pack200'ed artifacts over canonical ones. Did that ever made it into the code? Thx PaScaL ___ equinox-dev mailing list equinox-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev ___ equinox-dev mailing list equinox-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev ___ equinox-dev mailing list equinox-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200
The only support I know is in MirrorRequest#perform, but it is quite rudimentary. Essentially if the repository is local, it prefers a descriptor in canonical form (not packed/zipped), and if the repository is remote it prefers a descriptor in non-canonical form. It doesn't have any further smarts about which non-canonical form is available. Also, the pack200 processing step does a check for the unpack200 executable so it will quickly abort if unpacking is not available on the client. Pascal Rapicault/Ottawa/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/24/2008 09:14 PM Please respond to Equinox development mailing list To Equinox development mailing list cc Subject [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200 I seem to remember that someone was working on adding to support to our download manager to favor downloading pack200'ed artifacts over canonical ones. Did that ever made it into the code? Thx PaScaL ___ equinox-dev mailing list equinox-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev ___ equinox-dev mailing list equinox-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200
The support for pack200 is in a separate bundle which is not mandatory to the proper functioning of p2. Therefore even if the download manager was trying to get a pack200 version of a given artifact (by checking in the table of content of available artifacts,no round-trip to the server), it would not succeed and fail back to download another form of that artifact. Another point in that area, is that even though we are currently focused on pack200, the direction here is for the download manager to be able to pick the most suitable format of an artifact from the available ones. HTH, PaScaL |> | From: | |> >| |Jim Colson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | >| |> | To:| |> >| |Equinox development mailing list | >| |> | Cc:| |> >| |Equinox development mailing list , [EMAIL PROTECTED] | >| |> | Date: | |> >| |01/24/2008 09:25 PM | >| |> | Subject: | |> >----------------------------| |Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200 | >| how would that work on J2ME (CDC/Foundatoin)? Jim Colson, Chief Architect - IBM Client Software Distinguished Engineer IBM Academy of Technology Board Member - IT Architect Certification 11501 Burnet Rd. Austin, TX 78758 Ph 512-823-7357, Fax 512-838-0962 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Admin: Sandra Wallis 512-838-3241 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Pascal Rapicault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Equinox development mailing list Date: 01/24/2008 08:11 PM Subject:[equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200 I seem to remember that someone was working on adding to support to our download manager to favor downloading pack200'ed artifacts over canonical ones. Did that ever made it into the code? Thx PaScaL ___ equinox-dev mailing list equinox-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev ___ equinox-dev mailing list equinox-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev ___ equinox-dev mailing list equinox-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
Re: [equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200
how would that work on J2ME (CDC/Foundatoin)? Jim Colson, Chief Architect - IBM Client Software Distinguished Engineer IBM Academy of Technology Board Member - IT Architect Certification 11501 Burnet Rd. Austin, TX 78758 Ph 512-823-7357, Fax 512-838-0962 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Admin: Sandra Wallis 512-838-3241 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Pascal Rapicault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Equinox development mailing list Date: 01/24/2008 08:11 PM Subject:[equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200 I seem to remember that someone was working on adding to support to our download manager to favor downloading pack200'ed artifacts over canonical ones. Did that ever made it into the code? Thx PaScaL ___ equinox-dev mailing list equinox-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev ___ equinox-dev mailing list equinox-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
[equinox-dev] [prov] Download manager support for pack200
I seem to remember that someone was working on adding to support to our download manager to favor downloading pack200'ed artifacts over canonical ones. Did that ever made it into the code? Thx PaScaL ___ equinox-dev mailing list equinox-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
