GNU bug report logs -
#28663
[PATCH] New java packages
Previous Next
Reported by: Julien Lepiller <julien <at> lepiller.eu>
Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2017 17:47:01 UTC
Severity: normal
Tags: patch
Done: Julien Lepiller <julien <at> lepiller.eu>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
Full log
Message #98 received at 28663 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Le 2017-10-03 11:09, Ricardo Wurmus a écrit :
> julien <at> lepiller.eu writes:
>
>> From: Julien Lepiller <julien <at> lepiller.eu>
>>
>> * guix/build-system/ant.scm: New #:main-class argument
>> * guix/build/ant-build-system.scm: Generate a manifest file with
>> additional properties.
>> ---
> […]
>> + (target (@ (name "manifest"))
>> + (mkdir (@ (dir "${manifest.dir}")))
>> + (echo (@ (file "${manifest.file}")
>> + (message ,(string-append
>> + (if main-class
>> + (string-append
>> + "Main-Class: "
>> main-class
>> +
>> "${line.separator}")
>> + "")
>> + "")))))
>> +
>> (target (@ (name "compile"))
>> (mkdir (@ (dir "${classes.dir}")))
>> (javac (@ (includeantruntime "false")
>> @@ -97,10 +112,11 @@
>> (include (@ (name
>> "**/*Test.java" )))))))
>>
>> (target (@ (name "jar")
>> - (depends "compile"))
>> + (depends "compile, manifest"))
>> (mkdir (@ (dir "${jar.dir}")))
>> (exec (@ (executable "jar"))
>> - (arg (@ (line ,(string-append "-cf
>> ${jar.dir}/" jar-name
>> + (arg (@ (line ,(string-append "-cmf
>> ${manifest.file} "
>> +
>> "${jar.dir}/" jar-name
>> " -C
>> ${classes.dir} ."))))))
>
> This is good, thank you. Could you please also document this in the
> manual in section “Build Systems”?
Is something like this OK? I will divide that paragraph in the two
commits of course.
+The @code{#:main-class} parameter can be used with the minimal ant
build
+file to specify the main class of the resulting jar. This makes the
jar
+file executable. The @code{#:test-include} parameter can be used to
specify the
+list of junit tests to run. It defaults to @code{(list
"**/*Test.java")}.
+The @code{#:test-exclude} can be used to disable some tests. It
defaults to
+@code{(list "**/Abstract*.java")}, because abstract classes cannot be
run as
+tests.
>
> One question remains, though: will this affect the timestamps inside
> the
> jar file? If so, can we reset the timestamp to ensure reproducibility?
I think it's taken care of by the strip-jar-timestamps phase, but I will
check.
I also have a side-question:
Some of the maven packages use three or four different generators, and
some dependencies (such as java-eclipse-sisu-plexus) have a lot of
runtime dependencies that are not discovered by java. The issue here is
that including java-eclipse-sisu-plexus in the inputs field of a package
is enough to build it, but not to run it. We could use propagated-inputs
for that, as in the python world, but it doesn't feel right. This issue
is also present for test dependencies where I would get a lot of runtime
error because java cannot find a dependency of a dependency.
I see that there is a Class-Path entry that can be added to the
MANIFEST.MF file, and that could be a way java could find the
dependencies of a package.
The jar file is actually a zip archive. Would the grafter be able to
graft it?
Do you know whether Class-Path is transitive?
Is there a way to programmatically filter inputs from native- and
propagated- inputs? Or should we ask the packager to give a list of
dependencies in a build argument, effectively duplicating some code?
I had this issue with the antlr tools too, but I found a solution: I
added a shell wrapper that uses the correct classpath, but it only works
because antlr is not a library.
Thank for your review and sorry for the unexpected questions.
This bug report was last modified 7 years and 234 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.