On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 12:43 PM Mikolaj Izdebski <mizdebsk(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 12:17 PM Fabio Valentini <decathorpe(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 5:03 PM Mikolaj Izdebski <mizdebsk(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 3:20 PM Mat Booth <fedora(a)matbooth.co.uk> wrote:
> > > Eclipse in Fedora has dropped support for 32 bit architectures. The newest
builds of Eclipse 4.11 for F30 and newer reflect this and are built for 64 bit
architectures only.
> > >
> > > By now I have touched most Eclipse plug-in packages to limit their
availability to the same architectures as Eclipse itself. If you own a package that is not
an Eclipse plug-in but it does have a build or runtime dependency on Eclipse, then you
will need to follow suit and make your package also exclude 32 bit architecture. If your
package simply depends on Eclipse/Equinox for OSGi APIs, then you might be better
switching your package to build against the OSGi APIs provided by the
osgi-core/osgi-compendium packages instead to stay available on all architecture. Feel
free to ping if you are unsure how to proceed.
>
> On koschei, I'm getting the following issues for the stewardship-sig
> packages (there are probably more, but builds don't always hit 32-bit
> builders):
>
> avalon-framework:
> Problem: package log4j-2.11.1-3.fc30.noarch requires
> mvn(org.eclipse.persistence:javax.persistence), but none of the
> providers can be installed
> - conflicting requests
> - nothing provides mvn(org.eclipse.osgi:org.eclipse.osgi) needed
> by eclipselink-persistence-api-2.1.0-7.fc30.noarch
>
> avalon-logkit:
> Problem: package log4j-2.11.1-3.fc30.noarch requires
> mvn(org.eclipse.persistence:javax.persistence), but none of the
> providers can be installed
> - conflicting requests
> - nothing provides mvn(org.eclipse.osgi:org.eclipse.osgi) needed
> by eclipselink-persistence-api-2.1.0-7.fc30.noarch
>
> log4j:
> Problem: conflicting requests
> - nothing provides mvn(org.eclipse.osgi:org.eclipse.osgi) needed
> by eclipselink-persistence-api-2.1.0-7.fc30.noarch
>
> If I understand correctly, that's a case where we should "switch"
> log4j to using the different "OSGi APIs" you mentioned?
> For now, I've added an "x86_64" arch override to these three packages
> in koschei, so we can see if they can build successfully on at least
> one architecture.
First, some cotext:
Apache Log4j is a logging library. Among other possibilities, it can
log to a relational database through JPA [1].
Log4j uses EclipseLink as it is the reference implementations of JPA.
EclipseLink (obviously) depends on Eclipse, which is now unavailable
on 32-bit arches.
But EclipseLink is not the only available implementation of JPA. We
also have other implementations packaged. The ones I am aware of:
Hibernate 5, Hibernate 4, Hibernate 3, Apache OpenJPA.
Possible solutions that I can think of (in order from most to least preferred):
1. make EclipseLink not depend on Eclipse (but I don't how feasible
that would be)
2. switch log4j to use different implementation of JPA (should be easy)
3. disable JPA support in log4j (trivial, but will break users)
[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_Persistence_API
Ah, I see. Thanks for the clarification. I've worked on a Project
using springframework / JPA / hibernate before, but I didn't know how
all the pieces fit together under the hood.
So Option 1 would require help from the eclipse/EclipseLink
maintainers? So ... Option 2 sounds like the probable outcome.
Fabio
> --
> Mikolaj Izdebski
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: