Re: Need comments about -jdbc packaging

From: John Harvey <john(dot)harvey(at)crunchydata(dot)com>
To: Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-pkg-yum <pgsql-pkg-yum(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Need comments about -jdbc packaging
Date: 2016-02-11 15:39:30
Message-ID: CABcP5fjyWSxH_eF-B5BOWRkEz0_y8s+_OVVpOLp6On_LavON9g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-pkg-yum

All right, final comment today-- found what was breaking my EL-6 build.

%_javadir/java/postgresql-jdbc.jar
%_javadir/maven2/poms/JPP-postgresql-jdbc.pom

should be:

%{_datadir}/java/postgresql-jdbc.jar
%{_datadir}/maven2/poms/JPP-postgresql-jdbc.pom

Otherwise, EL-6 doesn't compile for me.

Regards,
-John

On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 9:43 AM, John Harvey <john(dot)harvey(at)crunchydata(dot)com>
wrote:

> One more comment.
>
> The below block doesn't work for me on EL-7:
>
> %if 0%{?rhel} && 0%{?rhel} <= 6
> # On RHEL 6, we depend on the apache-maven package that we provide via
> # our repo. Build servers should not have any other apache-maven package
> # from other repos, because they depend on java-1.7.0, which is not
> supported by pgjdbc.
> # Please note that we don't support RHEL 5 for this package.
> BuildRequires: apache-maven
> %else
> # On the remaining distros, use the maven package supplied by OS.
> BuildRequires: maven
> %endif
>
> error: Failed build dependencies:
> maven
>
> I think the BuildRequires: apache-maven line should apply to EL-6 and
> EL-7. Otherwise, I do not know where to get this dependency for EL-7.
>
> Regards,
> -John
>
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 7:56 AM, John Harvey <john(dot)harvey(at)crunchydata(dot)com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Devrim,
>>
>> Doing a scan of the specfile, I found a few other opportunities:
>>
>> I am pretty sure that these lines can be removed:
>> BuildRequires: jpackage-utils
>> BuildRequires: ant
>> BuildRequires: ant-junit
>> BuildRequires: junit
>> I am pretty sure that I am able to successfully build without any of
>> these packages. I think these are legacy requirements from the ant days.
>>
>> The BuildRequires line for apache-maven should specify 3.0.0 or greater
>> (2.x is a little different):
>> apache-maven >= 3.0.0
>>
>> Apart from that, no other issues to report.
>>
>> Regards,
>> -John
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 7:43 AM, John Harvey <john(dot)harvey(at)crunchydata(dot)com
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Devrim,
>>>
>>> I'm not the expert here by any means; I only just got interested in this
>>> project when moving from ant to maven became something new and fun to try
>>> to put together. So, feel free to take my opinion for what it is-- just an
>>> opinion.
>>>
>>> After some research, I found this thread awhile back which might contain
>>> helpful information:
>>> http://postgresql.nabble.com/Release-for-9-5-td5873644.html
>>>
>>> In short, it says that the team does not want to use postgresql's
>>> version number in the artifacts. This would explain why the current
>>> releases of pgjdbc are not prefixed with 9.5, and are still at 9.4. It is
>>> my guess that the numbering of pgjdbc will stay on 9.4 for some time. But,
>>> I think this is sufficient evidence that having a hard dependency on a
>>> postgres major version is something that is not needed. So, I think I
>>> agree with your assessment. If you wanted a second opinion, Dave Cramer
>>> might be the best person to comment.
>>>
>>> Additionally, I can verify that the if-block's make sense in the
>>> combined spec-file. I tried one of your pre-release specfiles on EL6 and
>>> had issues with "add_maven_depmap", "%files -f .mfiles", and the 2
>>> "_javadir" files. I think the if-blocks are clean, and I approve your new
>>> changes with regard to making a combined specfile.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> -John
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> While working on a unified -jdbc package, I noticed that we have
>>>> PostgreSQL major number appended to package name, version, jar file,
>>>> etc.
>>>>
>>>> Do we really need that? This package does not depend on PostgreSQL, so
>>>> I think we can remove it.
>>>>
>>>> Attached is the spec file that I intend to push later tonight to git,
>>>> so that we can ship this package along with tomorrow's releases.
>>>>
>>>> This package has some comment improvements and conditionals for unified
>>>> spec file...
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> --
>>>> Devrim GÜNDÜZ
>>>> Principal Systems Engineer @ EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
>>>> PostgreSQL Danışmanı/Consultant, Red Hat Certified Engineer
>>>> Twitter: @DevrimGunduz , @DevrimGunduzTR
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-pkg-yum by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message 大山真実 2016-02-12 05:58:59 yum package for pg_repack-1.3.3
Previous Message John Harvey 2016-02-11 14:43:36 Re: Need comments about -jdbc packaging