This is related to bug #245054. The eclipse-ecj package in Fedora is incompatible with JPackage 1.7 ecj. This causes compatibility problems as well as (unnecessary) changes when porting between JPackage and Fedora Compatibility can be achieved by adding the correct Provides and symlinks to the eclipse-ecj package. 1.) Add Obsoletes: ecj < %{version}-%{release} Provides: ecj = %{version}-%{release} 2.) Create the symlinks %{_javadir}/ecj-%{version}.jar %{_javadir}/ecj.jar 3.) The files %{_javadir}/eclipse-ecj.jar and %{_javadir}/jdtcore.jar currently don't have versioned symlinks. I don't see any harm in adding them. The worst that could happen is that they are unused.
I think the original reason this was done was because ecj and eclipse-ecj are built from different sources and we can't guarantee that they'll be providing the exact same bits. Is this no longer the case? Either way, I'd be happy to apply a patch. I'll see if I can find a second to whip something up if there isn't one in existence. I can't do anything about RHEL-5 (but #245054).
So we can't assume that ecj from eclipse 3.3.1.1 is the same as ecj 3.3.1.1? The other way to solve it is to build ecj from the standalone sources as I believe it is done in Mandriva and Ubuntu already, but I don't really see this as a big issue.
(In reply to comment #2) > So we can't assume that ecj from eclipse 3.3.1.1 is the same as ecj 3.3.1.1? I've never seen the build procedure for the standalone case. They could be generating the same jar, but I haven't looked at it. > The other way to solve it is to build ecj from the standalone sources as I > believe it is done in Mandriva and Ubuntu already, but I don't really see > this as a big issue. Is there an advantage? I've always thought of jdtcore as being _part_ of the JDT and thus splitting it into a separate package just to be built again as part of the SDK didn't seem right.
It allows you to have a more-or-less standalone Java compiler (without pulling in all of eclipse and its dependencies).
I think this was the initial motivation for the ecj package and for only Obsoleting/Providing <= 2.1 (or whatever it is). We figured if people wanted a separate ecj package that they could build it as JPackage does and that it would be independent of the JDT.
The jpackage version of ecj uses the full eclipse sources with all the non-ecj stuff deleted so that it uses the same ant files as the full build would use. We created a custom tarball (with the script inside it which I believe is the fedora policy) because the standalone sources did not include ant build files (for some reason which I was unable to discern). http://www.jpackage.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/rpms/free/ecj/ecj.spec?revision=1.1.2.4&root=jpackage&view=markup&pathrev=JPACKAGE-1_7
Okay, thanks for the clarification that they're built from the same sources. I think the only-obsoleting-less-than-2.1 thing can go away. The symlinking is fine by me, too. Anyone have a patch? If I can find time, I'll do it.
Created attachment 300274 [details] relevant sections of 3.3.2, etc. patch I just updated to 3.3.2 (something I should have done a month ago) and did this at the same time. Please let me know if the attached patch seems like it'll break something or won't achieve the compatibility. I've got a rawhide (what'll become Fedora 9) build going now so we can test with those binary RPMs when the build finishes. You can watch for the build to finish and show up here: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=183
I think it looks OK, but what is/was the point of adding Provides: ecj <= (as opposed to =)? So, if something wants ecj = 2.1, this would satisfy it? Does that make sense?
(In reply to comment #9) > I think it looks OK, but what is/was the point of adding Provides: ecj <= (as > opposed to =)? So, if something wants ecj = 2.1, this would satisfy it? Does > that make sense? I don't know why the original <= was there. I think maybe to get some older ecj package to be removed when this was installed. Do you think I should just make it = ?
I think it should be Obsoletes: ecj < %{version}-%{release} Provides: ecj = %{version}-%{release} but I am not sure what the use of <= is.
Changed to =, killed build, re-started build.
Fixed in 3.3.2-2.