Bug 1305871

Summary: XJC path expansion for python sdk build
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization Manager Reporter: Pavol Brilla <pbrilla>
Component: ovirt-engine-sdk-pythonAssignee: Juan Hernández <juan.hernandez>
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE QA Contact: Pavol Brilla <pbrilla>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 3.6.0CC: gklein, juan.hernandez, lsurette, mgoldboi, oourfali, pbrilla, yeylon, ykaul
Target Milestone: ovirt-3.6.3   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: All   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: rhevm-sdk-python-3.6.2.1-2 Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: 1305482 Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-02-17 07:33:27 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: Infra RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Pavol Brilla 2016-02-09 12:49:00 UTC 
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #1305482 +++

Description of problem:

During erratum run I received:
/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/ovirt-engine-sdk-python-3.6.2.1/generator/regenerate.xml:22: Execute failed: java.io.IOException: Cannot run program "xjc": error=2, No such file or directory


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
rhevm-sdk-python-3.6.2.1-1.el6ev.noarch.rpm

How reproducible:
100%

Steps to Reproduce:
1.  run srpmtest for rhevm-sdk-python

Actual results:


Expected results:
xjc should be found

--- Additional comment from Juan Hernández on 2016-02-08 12:50:24 CET ---

This happens because we assume that the directory /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.8.0-openjdk always exists. But that isn't true, because this is created by the "alternatives" tool, and may not exist in some situations. To avoid this issue we can instead calculate JAVA_HOME like this:

JAVA_HOME=$(dirname $(rpm -ql java-1.8.0-openjdk-devel | grep '/bin$'))

--- Additional comment from Juan Hernández on 2016-02-08 12:51:56 CET ---

Pavol, do we need this fixed in order to pass TPS tests, or is there any workaround?
Comment 2 Oved Ourfali 2016-02-11 13:35:29 UTC 
Juan - should this be on_qa?
Comment 3 Juan Hernández 2016-02-11 13:42:12 UTC 
Yes, it should.
Comment 4 Gil Klein 2016-02-17 07:33:27 UTC 
This bug was fixed and is slated to be in the upcoming version. As we
are focusing our testing at this phase on severe bugs, this bug was
closed without going through its verification step. If you think this
bug should be verified by QE, please set its severity to high and move
it back to ON_QA