[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: dpkg-buildpackage mvn command tries to use /root/.m2/repository



>>>>> Markus Koschany <apo@debian.org>:

>> until mh_make eventually failed with the following error message:
>> Checking the parent dependency in the sub project itests/pom.xml
>> Analysing manual/pom.xml...

> I suggest to ignore this sub project for now (sounds like it is only
> needed for tests anyway). If you get more errors ignore even more
> modules until mh_make succeeds. Then you can start over again and add
> those modules you really need step by step.

I tried, but it was very strange.

The "manual" module wasn't in <modules> in the top POM of the unpacked
apache-karaf-4.1.4-src.tar.gz 

I first tried removing all of the "unnecessary" modules from <modules>
in the top pom of karaf 4.1.3, ie.
        <module>demos</module>
        <module>archetypes</module>
        <module>itests</module>

But that didn't help.  I still got the same error.

I then did:
 rm -rf demos
 rm -rf archetypes
 rm -rf itests
 rm -rf manual

But I *still* got the same error from mh_make.

I guess I need to start with a fresh source tarball unpack _and_ delete
~/.m2/repository, remove the "unneccessary" modules and subdirectries,
and try running mh_make again and see what happens.

> I would also use option 1 (change the version to the symbolic "debian"
> version). Otherwise the dependencies would be very strict which makes it
> more difficult to upgrade possible reverse-dependencies in the future.

I'm sure this is good advice in the general case.  But in the case of
karaf, the jars aren't intended for use outside karaf (at least, most of
the URLs).  And for karaf itself, all of the bundles of a particular
version belong together, and a karaf instance should not use bundles
from a different karaf version.

(I think (actually: "I guess"...) the reason karaf consists of so many
jars, is that it makes it possible for karaf to load and unload the
stuff at runtime, and not load things that aren't needed.)



Reply to: