This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.

Bug 119122 - Duplicated JARs
Summary: Duplicated JARs
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: www
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Builds & Repositories (show other bugs)
Version: 6.x
Hardware: All All
: P3 blocker (vote)
Assignee: Jesse Glick
URL: http://deadlock.netbeans.org/hudson/j...
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2007-10-16 20:27 UTC by Jesse Glick
Modified: 2007-10-16 22:36 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Issue Type: DEFECT
Exception Reporter:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Jesse Glick 2007-10-16 20:27:35 UTC
See URL. You seem to have four JARs duplicated in the ruby cluster for no obvious reason.
Comment 1 Torbjorn Norbye 2007-10-16 20:39:44 UTC
The reason for this is that there are two Ruby installations:  
- A full JRuby installation (which is optional, and users can choose not to install it if they intend to use for example
a native Ruby interpreter). This is installed into ruby1/jruby-1.0.1/
- A small part of JRuby used for in-IDE processing and parsing of code. This part is not optional. It's installed into
ruby1/modules/ and the extra jars it depends on are in ruby1/modules/ext/.

I don't want to try to make the IDE-JRuby-module find these jars out of the JRuby 1.0.1 tree, since that part is
optional. And I don't want to make the JRuby 1.0.1 setup try to find its bits in the ruby1 cluster, since these can
evolve independently.   In particular, I might upgrade the IDE-JRuby module to a trunk build or something to pick up
parsing fixes, but leave JRuby 1.0.1 (which runs user programs) at the stable release.

Does this explain the problem adequately? Do you have better suggestions for how this should be solved?
Comment 2 Jesse Glick 2007-10-16 21:24:13 UTC
If the duplication is intentional and you plan to keep it this way for 6.0, I can create an ignore list for this test -
just assign to jglick in nbbuild if so (keep issues@ruby or tor on CC).
Comment 3 Torbjorn Norbye 2007-10-16 21:30:54 UTC
Yes, this is intentional and won't change for 6.0.
Comment 4 Jesse Glick 2007-10-16 22:36:46 UTC
Checking in ignored-binary-overlaps;
/shared/data/ccvs/repository/nbbuild/antsrc/org/netbeans/nbbuild/extlibs/ignored-binary-overlaps,v  <-- 
ignored-binary-overlaps
initial revision: 1.1
done
Checking in CreateLicenseSummary.java;
/shared/data/ccvs/repository/nbbuild/antsrc/org/netbeans/nbbuild/extlibs/CreateLicenseSummary.java,v  <-- 
CreateLicenseSummary.java
new revision: 1.10; previous revision: 1.9
done