[fedora-java] Packaging tomcat shell scripts

[Robert Rati]

On 11/07/2013 02:29 AM, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 6:58 PM, Ivan Afonichev <ivan.afonichev at gmail.com> wrote:
>> So what is the decision of community?
>
> Hi,
>
> I've taken a look at the hadoop spec, and builded the httpfs
> sub-package. It is packaged as a classic all-in-one-dir "catalina
> base". I believe this goes against the guidelines [1] which state that
> "Fedora packages must follow the FHS".

The packaging is following the FHS guidelines and putting all files in 
the correct locations and symlinking.  The tomcat package does this as 
well (look at /usr/share/tomcat).

>> Is it good to have some /usr/share/*/bin/*.sh files?
>> It is not needed for tomcat package itself but some, not so systemd'ed,
>> stuff like hadoop's httpfs may be happy to use it.
>
> As I understand it, we cannot follow hadoop upstream's packaging just
> like the tomcat package doesn't. Also a "standard" java WAR (unpacked
> here) contains its JARs in its WEB-INF/lib directory, which seems to
> also go against java packaging guidelines [2]. It states that "All
> architecture-independent JAR files MUST go into %{_javadir} or [...]
> %{_javadir}-*".

The unpackaged WAR has it's jars replaced with symlinks and tomcat is 
told to follow symlinks for that service.

>> Should we package original upstream catalina.sh or we should create some
>> "service tomcat $@" emulation of it?
>
> There actually is a systemd service [3] in the tomcat package. And
> hadoop has a similar service [4], the difference is that tomcat
> doesn't stick to upstream's scripts because the guidelines don't allow
> to work the way they work.

The systemd script that is written for httpfs seems to work just fine 
and afaik is following Fedora's guidelines.

Rob