Re: apache-solr packaging?

On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 12:36 PM, David Walluck <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 10/24/2011 07:18 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>> On RHEL 5.x, it's dependency hell with sprinkles on top, even with
>> JPackage 6 enabled. It's livinig testament to why the "we can just
>> backport that to our stable OS" breaks down so badly when you try to
>> use leading edge tools. And I'm afraid a lot of it is going to be
>> wasted, because apache-solr-3.4.0 is out with a very distinct
>> dependency tree.
>
> JPackage uses CentOS 5.x for its build system so you'll have to be more
> specific. The only dependency issue I am seeing there is that
> lucene-contrib-2.x is older in JPackage than in Fedora.
>
> I know that RHEL 5.x does not have conflicting Java packages in the base
> OS the way that RHEL 6.x does. If anything, I would expect more problems
> on 6.x.  What is it that you're trying to do? Are you trying to install
> JPackage on top of Fedora?

I took the apache-solr package from Fedora 14, which works and is
cleanly buildable and installable on Fedora 14 and 15. I then tried to
compile it under RHEL 5, both with and without JPackage 6.0. Hilarity
ensued, especially as I tried to build the toolchain for
lucene-contrib and the toolchain to build *THAT*.

I'm delighted you've already published an SRPM for apache-solr-1.3 in
JPackage 6.0, and look forward to testing the SRPM for 1.4.1. The new
3.4.0 release is substantively different, and would have to await
another time for me to even look at.