The way we currently install Eclipse plugins in Fedora is incorrect and
RPM places all the plugin artifacts in the proper directories. However
that does not update the eclipse metadata. This means that until the
next time eclipse starts it is unaware of the newly installed plugins.
Because the user would normally run Eclipse not as root Eclipse does not
have permission to write to the meta data files located in the
installation directory. It therefore creates a parallel version in the
user's home directory ~/.eclipse. This creates a fragile installation
and leads to a whole host of problems.
To improve this I have written apatch which runs the Eclipse reconciler
during rpm installation. The Eclipse reconciler is an Eclipse
application which goes through and checks the installation directories
and updates the eclipse metadata with any newly installed plugins.
To add support for this in your eclipse package you have to add the
following line to your rpm spec file:
%_eclipse_pkg [package name]
Here is an example from the eclipse-rse spec file for the
The above macro expands to the following:
if [ $1 == 0 ]; then
I apologize if you have experienced instability in Eclipse installations
on rawhide, it is probably due to these changes. Please let me know if
you have any comments questions or suggestions.
I will be filing a request to update the Eclipse packaging guidelines.
If you are interested in the details of the work, here is a summary in
the form of a patch: http://fpaste.org/pPEC/
I have a non-java package (pl) which links to jvm. Build scripts of pl
needs to locate directories with libjava.so, libjvm.so etc. and instruct
native linker (ld) where to find them (-L option).
Current implementation in the pl.spec is uggly (a lot of ad-hoc hacks for
each platform which requires tuning time to time
So I decided to find ultimate way how to obtain path for linker and Java
home directory. Unfortunatelly, I did not find any. So I've written
one. You can find it as attachment at the afore-mentioned bug report.
Usage is inspired by pkg-config:
$ javac JavaConfig.java
$ java JavaConfig --home
$ java JavaConfig --libs-only-L
-L/usr/java/packages/lib/amd64 -L/usr/lib64 -L/lib64 -L/lib -L/usr/lib
I can bundle the tool to my `pl' package, but I think it could be
helpful for others too. So I'd like to ask Java SIG whether it wants to
adopt it (e.g. as a part of JDK).
Tomcat has a class called "Realm" which is basically a way of managing
the set of authentication mechanisms. PKI seems To use an older
approach which bypasses the Realm config in Tomcat. I started looking
at what it would take to close the distance between the two. In doing
so, I found something interesting in the openjdk code base:
In /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.6.0/jre/lib/security/java.security, there is a
section that looks like this:
# List of providers and their preference orders (see above):
# the NSS security provider was not enabled for this build; it can be
# if NSS (libnss3) is available on the machine. The nss.cfg file may need
# editing to reflect the location of the NSS installation.
So it seems that Sun had, at least in the past, supported NSS as a
Sercurity provider. For the member of the Java team not familiar with
NSS (I wasn't) It is the Network Security Services and is the basis for,
amongst other things, how Mozilla stores passwords and certificates.
PKI makes pretty heavy use of NSS, via the Opensource Java bindings in JSS.
This page here has more info:
It seems like the Oracle JDK has had support in the past for NSS as a
JAAS module. To close the acronym loop with Tomcat, Tomcat has a JAAS
Realm class. What this says to me is that, at one point, Java
developers could have configured Tomcat to use NSS as the authentication
mechanism for an application.
This class ships in the file:
And The native library is in
So it looks like we might have an additional Java implementation of NSS
available, one that can potentially provide NSS support for Tomcat and
JBoss via JAAS. It looks like all it requires is a change to the
configuration file that we ship. I'm not quite sure how we would go
about doing this in an automated fashion, short of pulling in libnss3 as
part of Open JDK support. I'm guessing that if we enable it and the nss
library is missing it errors our in some ugly manner, but I have not
Is anyone familiar with this code? Would it be acceptable to activate
this security module by default and to pull in libnss with Java? Is
there some automated way to enable this if NSS is installed?
I'm getting the following trying to build eclipse-ptp 5.0.2:
Processing inclusion from feature org.eclipse.ptp.rm.jaxb: Bundle
org.eclipse.ptp.rm.jaxb.core_220.127.116.11110041027 failed to resolve.:
Missing required plug-in javax.xml.stream_1.0.1.
I would have guessed that xml-commons-apis would have provided this (there are
items in javax/xml/stream), but there is not an entry for javax.xml.stream in
its manifest. File a bug?
Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222
NWRA/CoRA Division FAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane orion(a)cora.nwra.com
Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.cora.nwra.com
I'm one of the developers working on the next version of Dogtag, the
Public Key Infrastructure packages (pki-*) which is, as far as I can
tell, the only Java Web app that actually ships in Fedora.
PKI is an old project, and it has vestiges of many aspects of Java
development that are just done differently today. We are looking to
close the gap between where it is and where the Standard lies. As
such, we have to figure out how to attack packaging the application.
Part of that, for Fedora, is to establish the standard in the first place.
Dogtag ships with a utility called pkicreate. This is an application
that creates a Tomcat instance in (by default) /var/lib/pki-* and sets
the ports, the SELinux policy, the config, etc. While I think it does
more than it should, certain aspects of what it does are essential. For
example, it handles all of the SELinux configuration for the Tomcat
instance. Tomcat ships with SSL disabled, and without an AJP
connector to apache. Thus, Tomcat can't serve over port 80 or 443,
meaning that they can't be viewed by many people behind firewalls.
pkicreate configures mod_proxy_ajp support. It performs the SELinux
configuration for the HTTP ports (if they are different from 8080 and
8443 which should be handled by system policy), as well as the AJP port.
Russ Alberry, on the Debian Java team, has propsed a deployment utility
similar in scope to what pkicreate does, but for the general case:
Fedora 17 and later will have JBoss, which has a different set of
deployment rules. Geronimo is already part of Fedora, although I have
to admit ignorance as far as how it would interact with Tomcat. Resin
is a possiblity as well. So we don't want to hardcode the deployment
approach to the Tomcat server. But, the Tomcat install should be
For a directory standard, I would say that a Fedora Web app should not
have to provide a .war file, but should be able to use the tool to
produce one .
Many web applications allow for post install customization. THe
simplest case is that a Company wants to theme the application with its
own images and CSS. If the web application is delivered in a .war file
and expects to deploy this way on the Servlet engine, there is no way to
customize it. Thus, Russ' approach listed above seems right on. The
one thing I would adjust is that deployment as a war file should be an
option, but not necessarily the prefereed option. MOst application
servers have to unzip war files anyway, and it seems a waste and
troublesome to zip up the file only to unzip it. I say war is the
exception but not the rule.
pkicreate is a Perl application. As such, I don't think it will gain
wide acceptance in the Java community. But, it can server as a
prototype for A Java based java-deploy-webapp.
Here's a short list of functions that I think the deployment tool should
handle beyond what is listed in Russ' propsal:
1. Configuring Security Realms
2. Configuring JDBC connections (It would be nice if it configured
Postgresql and MySQL for JDBC, too....)
3. Configuring LDAP connections
4. Opening additional ports and providing SELinux configuration for them
5. Creating Symlinks for shared libraries to /usr/share/java and
6. Registering generic Global scoped components that can be accessed
via JNDI names.
It is possible that the workflow for java-deploy-webapp could best be
done using either Ant or Maven. However, I would not like to require a
.pom or build.xml file as part of the deployment: Web apps should
follow the standard, and requiring additional configuration should be
supported but not the norm. Perhaps we look for something like
/etc/webapp/name/pom.xml and, if it doesn't exist, generate it from a
skeleton. Or, we can say that if they provide the pom.xml, then we
support deploying this way, otherwise you are on your own.