FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian Java

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-11-2012, 12:42 AM
Jakub Adam
 
Default Eclipse and swt-gtk

Hi,

I noticed that packages libswt-gtk-3-java(-jni) seem to install the same version of swt as Eclipse
builds and uses internally.

From my point of view swt-gtk should be dropped and libswt-gtk-3-java package built from eclipse
sources (or keeping swt-gtk and using its libraries in Eclipse would do the same).

Is there some special reason to have two separate source packages for swt? If not I'd like to fix
this.

Also libecj-java seems to be a copy of org.eclipse.jdt.core (only with quite old version).

Regards,

Jakub


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4F0CE90C.9080404@ktknet.cz">http://lists.debian.org/4F0CE90C.9080404@ktknet.cz
 
Old 01-11-2012, 11:12 AM
Niels Thykier
 
Default Eclipse and swt-gtk

On 2012-01-11 02:42, Jakub Adam wrote:
> Hi,
>

Hi,

> I noticed that packages libswt-gtk-3-java(-jni) seem to install the same
> version of swt as Eclipse
> builds and uses internally.
>
> From my point of view swt-gtk should be dropped and libswt-gtk-3-java
> package built from eclipse
> sources (or keeping swt-gtk and using its libraries in Eclipse would do
> the same).
>
> Is there some special reason to have two separate source packages for
> swt? If not I'd like to fix
> this.
>

Your observations are correct, swt-gtk and eclipse both ship their own
copy of swt. There is a historical/practical reason for this, which we
unfortunately have not been able to fix.

The issue is that eclipse is sometimes a very difficult package to
maintain, which have left it RC-buggy and out of testing for months at a
time. Even now, eclipse has finally migrated to testing after 4
months[1]. What you don't see on the PTS anymore was that eclipse was
royally broken all of 2009 and possibly most of 2008 as well.

Compare that to swt-gtk which has been in testing for the past 4 years
or so. Hench it is much easier for maintainers to use swt-gtk as it is
usually faster updated and hardly ever RC-buggy (at least, compared to
eclipse).

Of course, now that eclipse / swt-gtk no longer uses xulrunner, it is
not as likely to be broken every 6 months when there is a new
xulrunner/iceweasel release.

> Also libecj-java seems to be a copy of org.eclipse.jdt.core (only with
> quite old version).
>

Unfortunately, we sort of need that extra copy (though, I suppose there
should be no problem in updating it). The reason is that:

eclipse needs openjdk to build. To build openjdk you need ecj and that
is either provided by libecj-java or eclipse-jdt.

No to mention there appears to be a similar issue with tomcat and
eclipse + libjasper-java and eclipse. The libjasper-java was originally
removed from Debian, but we re-added when we fixed eclipse in the late
2009 (or early 2010).

According to "DAK", the full breakage of removing ecj (the source
package) is[2].

> Regards,
>
> Jakub
>
>


~Niels

[1] The PTS does not know this yet - apparently "excuses" is
wrong/outdated as well. However,


http://release.debian.org/migration/testing.pl?package=eclipse

is correct. There most likely be a mail about the migration in about
5-6 hours from now on the pkg-java list.


[2]
$ dak rm -nR ecj
Working... done.
Will remove the following packages from unstable:

ecj | 3.5.1-3 | [...]
ecj | 3.5.1-3+b1 | [...]
ecj-gcj | 3.5.1-3 | [...]
ecj-gcj | 3.5.1-3+b1 | [...]
ecj1 | 3.5.1-3 | [...]
ecj1 | 3.5.1-3+b1 | [...]
libecj-java | 3.5.1-3 | [...]
libecj-java-gcj | 3.5.1-3 | [...]
libecj-java-gcj | 3.5.1-3+b1 | [...]

[...]

Checking reverse dependencies...
# Broken Depends:
commons-jci: libcommons-jci-eclipse-java
gcc-snapshot: gcc-snapshot [amd64 armel armhf i386 ia64 mips
mipsel powerpc s390 s390x sparc]
gcj-4.4: gcj-4.4-jdk
gcj-4.6: gcj-4.6-jdk
jasperreports: libjasperreports-java
jasperreports3.7: libjasperreports3.7-java
libjasper-java: libjasper-java
scilab-jims: scilab-jims [amd64 armel i386 ia64 mipsel]
spring-build: libspring-build-java
tomcat6: libtomcat6-java
tomcat7: libtomcat7-java
umlet: umlet

# Broken Build-Depends:
commons-jci: libecj-java
gcc-snapshot: libecj-java (>= 3.3.0-2)
gcj-4.4: libecj-java (>= 3.3.0-2)
gcj-4.6: libecj-java (>= 3.3.0-2)
gwt: libecj-java
jasperreports: libecj-java
jasperreports3.7: libecj-java
libjasper-java: libecj-java
libspring-java: libecj-java
openjdk-6: ecj-gcj
openjdk-7: ecj-gcj
scilab-jims: libecj-java
spring-build: libecj-java
tomcat6: libecj-java
tomcat7: libecj-java
umlet: libecj-java

Dependency problem found.




--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4F0D7C92.4070101@thykier.net">http://lists.debian.org/4F0D7C92.4070101@thykier.net
 
Old 01-14-2012, 10:30 PM
Jakub Adam
 
Default Eclipse and swt-gtk

Hi Niels,

thanks for your explanation of the SWT and Eclipse relationships.


Your observations are correct, swt-gtk and eclipse both ship their own
copy of swt. There is a historical/practical reason for this, which we
unfortunately have not been able to fix.

The issue is that eclipse is sometimes a very difficult package to
maintain, which have left it RC-buggy and out of testing for months at a
time. Even now, eclipse has finally migrated to testing after 4
months[1]. What you don't see on the PTS anymore was that eclipse was
royally broken all of 2009 and possibly most of 2008 as well.

Compare that to swt-gtk which has been in testing for the past 4 years
or so. Hench it is much easier for maintainers to use swt-gtk as it is
usually faster updated and hardly ever RC-buggy (at least, compared to
eclipse).


I agree with this, eclipse is a huge beast and having swt-gtk for practical
reasons makes sense. So I tried to approach the problem from the other side
and updated eclipse build to not compile its own SWT but use the one we
already have in libswt-gtk-*. So far everything works smoothly, including
for example web browser integration. This way we get the best of both worlds -
only one copy of swt in the system and maintainers still have a package that
is easier to handle and usable even in case that eclipse becomes broken again
anytime in the future.

I pushed my changes to the git repos[1][2], I think it is not so big that it
deserves a new upload of eclipse on its own, so I will not send any RFS for now,
waiting for some bigger update.

Regards,

Jakub

[1] http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-java/swt-gtk.git;a=commit;h=63117c4f32da3238d9801ddae2627ad 60f2e14a1
[2] http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-java/eclipse.git;a=commit;h=0c33b0e9288abfc0cdcad52ea17 dbbebd98fb102


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4F120FFA.9040406@ktknet.cz">http://lists.debian.org/4F120FFA.9040406@ktknet.cz
 
Old 01-16-2012, 12:12 PM
Niels Thykier
 
Default Eclipse and swt-gtk

On 2012-01-15 00:30, Jakub Adam wrote:
> Hi Niels,
>
> thanks for your explanation of the SWT and Eclipse relationships.
>
>> [...]
> I agree with this, eclipse is a huge beast and having swt-gtk for practical
> reasons makes sense. So I tried to approach the problem from the other side
> and updated eclipse build to not compile its own SWT but use the one we
> already have in libswt-gtk-*. So far everything works smoothly, including
> for example web browser integration. This way we get the best of both
> worlds -
> only one copy of swt in the system and maintainers still have a package
> that
> is easier to handle and usable even in case that eclipse becomes broken
> again
> anytime in the future.
>
> I pushed my changes to the git repos[1][2], I think it is not so big
> that it
> deserves a new upload of eclipse on its own, so I will not send any RFS
> for now,
> waiting for some bigger update.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jakub
>
> [1]
> http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-java/swt-gtk.git;a=commit;h=63117c4f32da3238d9801ddae2627ad 60f2e14a1
>
> [2]
> http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-java/eclipse.git;a=commit;h=0c33b0e9288abfc0cdcad52ea17 dbbebd98fb102
>
>
>

That sounds good.

Do you know if this stops eclipse from "extracting/installing" the SWT
binaries into ~/.eclipse ? I know this has been a repeating issue with
eclipse. I originally created the "debian-load-internal-swt.patch"
patch to fix that, though as I recall it was not as effective as I had
hoped.

~Niels


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4F142226.7090208@thykier.net">http://lists.debian.org/4F142226.7090208@thykier.net
 
Old 01-16-2012, 02:45 PM
Jakub Adam
 
Default Eclipse and swt-gtk

Hi Niels,


Do you know if this stops eclipse from "extracting/installing" the SWT
binaries into ~/.eclipse ?


Yes it does, only SWT binaries left are the ones in /usr/lib/jni installed by
libswt-gtk-3-jni (and other swt -jni packages).


I originally created the "debian-load-internal-swt.patch"
patch to fix that, though as I recall it was not as effective as I had
hoped.


I noticed that patch and dropped it during the process as there is no need
for /usr/lib/eclipse/debian-swt directory anymore.

Regards,

Jakub


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4F144627.2070001@ktknet.cz">http://lists.debian.org/4F144627.2070001@ktknet.cz
 
Old 01-16-2012, 08:48 PM
Matthias Klose
 
Default Eclipse and swt-gtk

On 01/16/2012 04:45 PM, Jakub Adam wrote:
> Hi Niels,
>
>> Do you know if this stops eclipse from "extracting/installing" the SWT
>> binaries into ~/.eclipse ?
>
> Yes it does, only SWT binaries left are the ones in /usr/lib/jni installed by
> libswt-gtk-3-jni (and other swt -jni packages).
>
>> I originally created the "debian-load-internal-swt.patch"
>> patch to fix that, though as I recall it was not as effective as I had
>> hoped.
>
> I noticed that patch and dropped it during the process as there is no need
> for /usr/lib/eclipse/debian-swt directory anymore.i

is this really that a good idea to use the external swt-gtk in eclipse? what if
an updated swt-gtk is uploaded that breaks eclipse? Otoh, it would be nice to
build every architecture dependent library from a separate source and make
eclipse build only binary-indep packages.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4F149B21.1000804@ubuntu.com">http://lists.debian.org/4F149B21.1000804@ubuntu.com
 
Old 01-19-2012, 09:23 PM
Jakub Adam
 
Default Eclipse and swt-gtk

Hi Matthias,


is this really that a good idea to use the external swt-gtk in eclipse? what if
an updated swt-gtk is uploaded that breaks eclipse?


Well, this can be said about any package and its dependencies, still most of the
time in Debian I see effort to reuse common library packages rather than bundle
a private copy with every application.

SWT is developed together with Eclipse so updates of these two packages should
most of the time go hand in hand.


Otoh, it would be nice to
build every architecture dependent library from a separate source and make
eclipse build only binary-indep packages.


Yes this possibility exists and if there was enough interest, I think it
wouldn't be much work to split Eclipse in such a way. With SWT as the biggest
arch dependent part already removed, if I remember correctly, there is still
only native library in org.eclipse.core.filesystem, Equinox launcher and the
Eclipse executable itself.

But on the other side having such a complex package to build on all architectures
can be beneficial as a test of JVM implementation maturity on those not so
commonly used platforms, for example last build of eclipse discovered a bug in
openjdk on armel[1].

Regards,

Jakub

[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=654209


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4F1897FF.9060800@ktknet.cz">http://lists.debian.org/4F1897FF.9060800@ktknet.cz
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 11:21 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org