From owner-freebsd-eclipse@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 10 06:25:04 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-eclipse@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81FBC16A41B for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 06:25:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mbowie@buzmo.com) Received: from smtp1.dfw.fabriclabs.com (smtp1.dfw.fabriclabs.com [69.12.11.77]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35EDA13C46E for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 06:25:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mbowie@buzmo.com) Received: from workshop.sv.buzmo.com (adsl-70-239-150-129.dsl.irvnca.sbcglobal.net [70.239.150.129] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp1.dfw.fabriclabs.com (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l8A6Nfjx039643; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 01:23:45 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from mbowie@buzmo.com) Message-ID: <46E4E2F3.6040201@buzmo.com> Date: Sun, 09 Sep 2007 23:23:47 -0700 From: Mike Bowie User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070825) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ken Yamada References: <46E413CE.5050209@buzmo.com> <20070909191227.GA12241@misty.eyesbeyond.com> <46E446A4.8090305@buzmo.com> <20070910.143323.48534083.ken@tydfam.jp> In-Reply-To: <20070910.143323.48534083.ken@tydfam.jp> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dan@rucci.org, freebsd-eclipse@freebsd.org Subject: Re: eclipse 3.3.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-eclipse@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "FreeBSD users of eclipse EDI, tools, rich client apps & ports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 06:25:04 -0000 Ken Yamada wrote: > Mike, > > It does not run with jdk1.5.0 - it generates "Bad version number in .class file" error. So, we'd better include JAVA_HOME=/usr/local/jdk1.6.0 in eclipse.in. > > I reflected your patch, the above and eliminating unnecessary working files to my eclipse-europa-dan.tgz and confirmed that it works at http://www.tydfam.jp/eclipse-europa-dan.tgz. > > Instruction.html and "Building the Eclipse executable from the eclipse SDK download:" does not tell much about how we can automate it unfortunately. "features/eclipse.equinox.executable" is a newly organized hierarchy and build.xml looks not fully incorporate this change. > > Europa updates works OK, Subclipse works OK, but JBossTools 2.0.0Beta3 does not - it seemingly falls into a long nap. (My driver of eclipse 3.3 is JBossTools, so it is very unfortunate personally .....) > > I have no problem with Greg's suggestion - put it to eclipse-devel, and you may use the file freely with Dan's concent however eclipse 3.4M1 is already there and we may better find a good strategy to chase this rapidly evolving creature. > > > Ken et al, Unless I'm mistaken, eclipse.in will use the JAVA_HOME value defined by the Makefile, which will be 1.6. I don't think it will need to be set statically, which IMHO will add an extra step to future porting efforts. (Including the 1.5 build, if that is made to work in the future.) I'm not really sure about the launcher build issue... and it doesn't look like I'll have time to get into it before I head away. I'd be surprised if the problem exists across the board with other platforms though... although perhaps the majority of users use the packaged builds. (I should do some googling on the issue, but my hands are a bit full right now.) FWIW, I'm successfully using PHPeclipse, Subclipse and the Apache LDAP browser plugins... I do need to install RSE and see how that does; but that's about my lot. I agree that it would be great to see FreeBSD port following the Eclipse releases more closely... and I did see someone talking about 3.4M1 on IRC today. (From what I hear, there's a few hefty compat issues with plugins.) I'm not sure what the best course of action is to reduce the workload in the future; I'm guessing that previous ports have been offered back to Eclipse for inclusion (as per Instructions.html), but who's to say. Either way, it would probably be a good call to submit the patch set back to the Eclipse project... I'm sure it would be a step in the right direction. As Ken mentioned, it would be good to streamline the process, but other than trying to get the FreeBSD basics back into the release stream, what can be put in place to reduce the repetition etc going forward? Per Dan's posting earlier this evening, I don't have a concern with the build warnings per say; that was merely a reflection of Ken's earlier comments. From a user perspective, they're no more ominous than those of building previous Eclipse ports and are, after all 'warnings' ;-). BTW, I noticed I'd top posted a reply or two earlier... my apologies if anyone was irked by that, I just wasn't paying attention. :-p Cheers, Mike.