Github user scwf closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is
Github user srowen commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-73677059
I think this should be closed unless we can know why excluding
`MANIFEST.MF` entirely is not a solution.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this
Github user scwf commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-73680329
yes this solution is a hack, have not found a proper way to fix this, and
now we do not use MANIFEST.MF in sql/beeline, so close this.
---
If your project is set up for
Github user scwf commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-69245380
Ping
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and
Github user scwf commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-68410347
Ping
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and
Github user scwf commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-64097615
Hi, @pwendell can you take a look at this? I think we'd better fix this
issue and also #3124 in 1.2 release.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this
Github user scwf commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-63495646
ping @pwendell
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-62296677
[Test build #23116 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/23116/consoleFull)
for PR 3103 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-62296681
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
Github user liancheng commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-62295066
retest this please
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-62295132
[Test build #23116 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/23116/consoleFull)
for PR 3103 at commit
Github user scwf commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#discussion_r19930730
--- Diff: assembly/pom.xml ---
@@ -43,12 +43,7 @@
/properties
dependencies
-!-- Promote Guava to compile scope in this module so it's
Github user srowen commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#discussion_r19930826
--- Diff: assembly/pom.xml ---
@@ -43,12 +43,7 @@
/properties
dependencies
-!-- Promote Guava to compile scope in this module so
Github user scwf commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#discussion_r19931047
--- Diff: assembly/pom.xml ---
@@ -43,12 +43,7 @@
/properties
dependencies
-!-- Promote Guava to compile scope in this module so it's
Github user srowen commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#discussion_r19931283
--- Diff: assembly/pom.xml ---
@@ -43,12 +43,7 @@
/properties
dependencies
-!-- Promote Guava to compile scope in this module so
Github user scwf commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-61941229
@srowen Why not exclude MANIFEST.MF and also set entries you want?
maybe i miss understand you, you mean change as follows? :
```
diff --git
Github user srowen commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-61941381
@scwf Yes that's what I mean. I don't even think it's necessary to set
Spark properties.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user scwf commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-61942527
@srowen Actually i have tried that, and the result is the MANIFEST.MF still
in assembly jar. I mean when set
```
+ manifestEntries
+
Github user srowen commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-61942745
@scwf Yes, again, what is in MANIFEST.MF in this case? just the props you
set? that's fine. Or: how about no MANIFEST.MF? is there a problem with that? I
don't think what
Github user scwf commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-61943323
SBT produce the MF as follows, it discards other third party MANIFEST.MF
but fill in spark's:
```
Manifest-Version: 1.0
Implementation-Vendor: org.apache.spark
Github user scwf commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-61943728
@srowen, ok, i will exclude MANIFEST.MF so that there is no MANIFEST.MF in
maven assembly jar.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have
Github user srowen commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-61943984
OK. This PR should produce the same output in the Maven build. If you mean
that setting manifest entries causes it to ignore excludes for MANIFEST.MF...
hm really? that
Github user scwf commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-61944162
Yes, in my locally test it is.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have
Github user scwf commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-61944708
Now this PR make Maven produce the same output with SBT. You can have a
test.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear
Github user scwf commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-61835534
Ok, agree, I think we should use hive version for beeline. If we use spark
version, we really do not know the real version of beeline since now both hive
12 and 13
Github user scwf commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-61840636
Actually i change like this,
```
diff --git a/assembly/pom.xml b/assembly/pom.xml
index 1a9a445..1b85929 100644
--- a/assembly/pom.xml
+++
Github user srowen commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-61841859
But does it have all the old Guava stuff still? MANIFEST.MF will be
generated by default and probably have some generic Maven plugin info in it.
That's OK.
---
If your
Github user scwf commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-61904203
It is very strange.
1
```diff --git a/assembly/pom.xml b/assembly/pom.xml
index 1a9a445..1b85929 100644
--- a/assembly/pom.xml
+++ b/assembly/pom.xml
Github user liancheng commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-61923958
@scwf Weird, I just tried exactly the same modification again, but no
MANIFEST.MF is found in the assembly jar :( And this behavior is steadily
reproducible. I'm using
Github user liancheng commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-61924072
The exactly the same modification in my last comment points to the one in
[this comment](https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-61840636).
---
If your
Github user scwf commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-61924268
@liancheng, you tried the 1 or 2 above?, for 1 there is no MANIFEST.MF but
for 2 it exists.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user scwf commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-61925443
@liancheng @srowenï¼Actually assembly jar MANIFEST.MF is sensitive to the
first dep of it's pom
now guava is the first one, so it use guava's MANIFEST.MF
```
Github user scwf commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-61927426
So now i move core dep to the first one and use transformer to overwrite
Implementation-* and Specification-*, then the MF is the same as SBT.
How about you idea?
---
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-61927531
[Test build #22985 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/22985/consoleFull)
for PR 3103 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-61932264
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#issuecomment-61932260
[Test build #22985 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/22985/consoleFull)
for PR 3103 at commit
Github user srowen commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/3103#discussion_r19930468
--- Diff: assembly/pom.xml ---
@@ -43,12 +43,7 @@
/properties
dependencies
-!-- Promote Guava to compile scope in this module so
37 matches
Mail list logo
