Home » Eclipse Projects » Eclipse Platform » Why PDE Build output different from Product Export?
| Why PDE Build output different from Product Export? [message #328030] |
Mon, 12 May 2008 19:17  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: wbeckwith.gmail.com
I'm building a RCP product with the following configuration:
Example.product includes the following 2 features in its configuration:
com.example.product.feature
org.eclipse.equinox.executable
The com.example.product.feature includes the com.example.platform
feature (that holds all the plugins) and includes a single plug-in,
com.example.product, that has the code to startup the workbench.
If I export the product using the link on the Overview tab, then I get
all the correct plug-ins and the appropriate executable in the eclipse
directory. PLus the config.ini looks like
#Product Runtime Configuration File
osgi.splashPath=platform:/base/plugins/com.example.product
eclipse.product=com.example.product.product
osgi.bundles.defaultStartLevel=4
osgi.bundles=org.eclipse.equinox.common@2:start,org.eclipse.update.configurator@3:start,org.eclipse.core.runtime@start
However, if I do a PDE Build of the Example.product then I still get all
the plug-ins/features but I don't get an actual executable to run the
application. Plus my config.ini looks like the following:
#Product Runtime Configuration File
osgi.splashPath=platform:/base/plugins/com.example.product
eclipse.product=com.example.product.product
sgi.bundles=org.eclipse.equinox.simpleconfigurator@1:start
org.eclipse.equinox.simpleconfigurator.configUrl=file:org.ec lipse.equinox.simpleconfigurator/bundles.info
osgi.bundles.defaultStartLevel=4
1.) Why is the pde build and the export generating different config.ini
files?
2.) Why is the executable included in the PDE export and not the PDE
build? I did copy the executable from the PDE export to the PDE build
and the app did come up, so it looks like the difference in config.ini
properties is not a blocking issue. However, the lack of an executable is.
Wb
|
|
|
| Re: Why PDE Build output different from Product Export? [message #328162 is a reply to message #328030] |
Thu, 15 May 2008 22:45  |
 Andrew Niefer
Messages: 990
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
On export PDE.UI provides the config.ini file, on headless build,
pde.build must generate it itself. With the advent of p2, there is a
new format to the config.ini file which uses the simpleconfigurator
bundle instead of the update.configurator bundle.
PDE.Build decides which format to use based on whether or not the
org.eclipse.equinox.simpleconfigurator bundle is included in the set of
bundles that we assembled for your product. It is likely that PDE.UI
uses a slightly different method to decide between formats.
As for the missing executable, I have no explanation, you should raise a
bug so we don't miss it.
-Andrew
Wendell Beckwith wrote:
> I'm building a RCP product with the following configuration:
>
> Example.product includes the following 2 features in its configuration:
> com.example.product.feature
> org.eclipse.equinox.executable
>
> The com.example.product.feature includes the com.example.platform
> feature (that holds all the plugins) and includes a single plug-in,
> com.example.product, that has the code to startup the workbench.
>
> If I export the product using the link on the Overview tab, then I get
> all the correct plug-ins and the appropriate executable in the eclipse
> directory. PLus the config.ini looks like
>
> #Product Runtime Configuration File
> osgi.splashPath=platform:/base/plugins/com.example.product
> eclipse.product=com.example.product.product
> osgi.bundles.defaultStartLevel=4
> osgi.bundles=org.eclipse.equinox.common@2:start,org.eclipse.update.configurator@3:start,org.eclipse.core.runtime@start
>
>
> However, if I do a PDE Build of the Example.product then I still get all
> the plug-ins/features but I don't get an actual executable to run the
> application. Plus my config.ini looks like the following:
>
> #Product Runtime Configuration File
> osgi.splashPath=platform:/base/plugins/com.example.product
> eclipse.product=com.example.product.product
> sgi.bundles=org.eclipse.equinox.simpleconfigurator@1:start
> org.eclipse.equinox.simpleconfigurator.configUrl=file:org.ec lipse.equinox.simpleconfigurator/bundles.info
>
> osgi.bundles.defaultStartLevel=4
>
> 1.) Why is the pde build and the export generating different config.ini
> files?
>
> 2.) Why is the executable included in the PDE export and not the PDE
> build? I did copy the executable from the PDE export to the PDE build
> and the app did come up, so it looks like the difference in config.ini
> properties is not a blocking issue. However, the lack of an executable is.
>
> Wb
|
|
|
| Re: Why PDE Build output different from Product Export? [message #328163 is a reply to message #328162] |
Thu, 15 May 2008 23:17 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: wbeckwith.gmail.com
Thanks for the update Andrew. I kinda guessed this was the case, but I
was operating under the assumption that PDE UI used PDE build under the
covers and thus dynamically created the build directory,
build.properties, etc. Thus the difference showing up seemed odd.
Anyway, I got past that issue and even got past the missing executable
issue. I'm not sure it was a bug and it just may have been a mistake in
my understanding.
Previously my .product file referred to the equinox executable feature
and my product feature. I changed the .product file to only list my
product feature and had the product feature include the my platform
feature (and included sub-features) and the equinox executable feature
and all has been well. In the old setup, PDE UI would always include
the executable, but in this variant now PDE Build and UI both work, so
life is better.
Wb
Andrew Niefer wrote:
> On export PDE.UI provides the config.ini file, on headless build,
> pde.build must generate it itself. With the advent of p2, there is a
> new format to the config.ini file which uses the simpleconfigurator
> bundle instead of the update.configurator bundle.
>
> PDE.Build decides which format to use based on whether or not the
> org.eclipse.equinox.simpleconfigurator bundle is included in the set of
> bundles that we assembled for your product. It is likely that PDE.UI
> uses a slightly different method to decide between formats.
>
> As for the missing executable, I have no explanation, you should raise a
> bug so we don't miss it.
>
> -Andrew
|
|
|
| Re: Why PDE Build output different from Product Export? [message #328282 is a reply to message #328163] |
Tue, 20 May 2008 16:45 |
Andrew Niefer
Messages: 990
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
To be clear, PDE/UI does use PDE/Build under the covers. There are just
some points where things differ:
- UI passes build the state instead of build creating one itself.
- UI takes care of product rootfiles itself
- UI is calling some of the generated scripts directly instead of going
through the main build.xml entry point.
-Andrew
Wendell Beckwith wrote:
> Thanks for the update Andrew. I kinda guessed this was the case, but I
> was operating under the assumption that PDE UI used PDE build under the
> covers and thus dynamically created the build directory,
> build.properties, etc. Thus the difference showing up seemed odd.
> Anyway, I got past that issue and even got past the missing executable
> issue. I'm not sure it was a bug and it just may have been a mistake in
> my understanding.
>
> Previously my .product file referred to the equinox executable feature
> and my product feature. I changed the .product file to only list my
> product feature and had the product feature include the my platform
> feature (and included sub-features) and the equinox executable feature
> and all has been well. In the old setup, PDE UI would always include
> the executable, but in this variant now PDE Build and UI both work, so
> life is better.
>
> Wb
>
> Andrew Niefer wrote:
>> On export PDE.UI provides the config.ini file, on headless build,
>> pde.build must generate it itself. With the advent of p2, there is a
>> new format to the config.ini file which uses the simpleconfigurator
>> bundle instead of the update.configurator bundle.
>>
>> PDE.Build decides which format to use based on whether or not the
>> org.eclipse.equinox.simpleconfigurator bundle is included in the set
>> of bundles that we assembled for your product. It is likely that
>> PDE.UI uses a slightly different method to decide between formats.
>>
>> As for the missing executable, I have no explanation, you should raise
>> a bug so we don't miss it.
>>
>> -Andrew
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat Jul 27 12:36:09 GMT 2024
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.05418 seconds |
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
