Bug 383681
| Summary: | Incorrect identifier for ppc64 in org.eclipse.core.runtime.Platform | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 | Reporter: | Norm Murray <nmurray> | ||||
| Component: | eclipse | Assignee: | Andrew Overholt <overholt> | ||||
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | desktop-bugs <desktop-bugs> | ||||
| Severity: | urgent | Docs Contact: | |||||
| Priority: | urgent | ||||||
| Version: | 5.1 | CC: | eclipse-bugs, hannsj_uhl, lagarcia, tao | ||||
| Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Reopened | ||||
| Target Release: | --- | ||||||
| Hardware: | ppc64 | ||||||
| OS: | Linux | ||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||
| Fixed In Version: | RHBA-2008-0441 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | ||||
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||||||
| Last Closed: | 2008-05-21 17:34:03 UTC | Type: | --- | ||||
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | ||||
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |||||
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |||||
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |||||
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |||||
| Embargoed: | |||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
The ppc64 support in eclipse is hacked in because it's not supported by default from eclipse.org. This is a bug in either the patch or the shell snippet that adds support for ppc64. Moving bug to Red Hat Eclipse team. This is the business justification which did not make it over from Issue Tracker: ----- Additional Comments From lagarcia.com (prefers email at lagarcia.ibm.com) 2007-11-16 14:03 EDT ------- RHEL is the only supported platform for Cell SDK & IDE on PPC64. Without this fix, Cell IDE is not functional and hence no RHEL user/SDK user will be able to develop applications using the Eclipse GUI for Cell. Development Management has reviewed and declined this request. You may appeal this decision by reopening this request. Created attachment 278891 [details]
Customer tested patch
Customer says that this patch fixes said bug, although I'd like to think that
such an obvious issue would be the work of generated code, not a human making
that assumption.
An advisory has been issued which should help the problem described in this bug report. This report is therefore being closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information on the solution and/or where to find the updated files, please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report if the solution does not work for you. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2008-0441.html |
Description of problem: in /usr/share/eclipse/plugins/org.eclipse.rcp.source_3.2.1.r321_v20060801-clWbqCmjexIWDqg/src/org.eclipse.core.runtime_3.2.0.v20060603/src.zip from the ppc64 rpms. the zip file contains Platform.java which contains this puzzling string. public static final String ARCH_IA64 = "ppc64"; //$NON-NLS-1 $ I'm not sure why the ARCH_IA64 identifier would be used for ppc64 and why this line is not contained within the 32 bit eclipse-rcp-sdk, with java being cross platform and all. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): eclipse-rcp-sdk-3.2.1-18.el5.ppc64.rpm How reproducible: Every time Steps to Reproduce: 1. cd usr/share/eclipse/plugins/org.eclipse.rcp.source_3.2.1.r321_v20060801-clWbqCmjexIWDqg/src/org.eclipse.core.runtime_3.2.0.v20060603/ 2. unzip src.zip 3. grep "ARCH_IA64 " org/eclipse/core/runtime/Platform.java Actual results: public static final String ARCH_IA64 = "ppc64"; //$NON-NLS-1$ Expected results: public static final String ARCH_PPC64 = "ppc64"; //$NON-NLS-1$ Additional info: The method org.eclipse.core.runtime.Platform.getOSArch() returns "ppc64", does return the correct architecture, however the constant associated with it on org.eclipse.core.runtime.Platform. "ppc64" is associated with ARCH_IA64, This can lead to problems as if we trust ARCH_IA64 to enable features on ia64 architectures these features will be also enabled on PPC64 (what is probably wrong) and also cause some confusion as we will have to check for ARCH_IA64 architectures when running on PPC64 platforms. I was unable to see this in the 32 bit version of RHEL5.