You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to derby-dev@db.apache.org by "David W. Van Couvering" <Da...@Sun.COM> on 2005/11/01 20:40:06 UTC
POLL: Remove need for DB2 JDBC driver from Derby build and test
I hope I'm not stepping on a landmine here, but does anyone else who
thinks it would be a good thing to remove the need for the DB2 JDBC
driver for our builds and tests? It's fine if it's an optional part,
like support for JDK 1.6, but it doesn't seem right that it's required
now that we have our own JDBC driver...
David
Bryan Pendleton wrote:
> Myrna van Lunteren wrote:
>
>> I think your problem is indeed with db2jcc. Your sysinfo reports it's
>> version 1.0:
>> "[/home/bpendleton/downloads/derby/db2jcc/lib/db2jcc.jar] 1.0 -
>> (581)"
>> I think we only support 2.4 and up with derby 10 and up. Try to
>> download a later version if you need jcc.
>
>
> Ah, good.
>
> I was rather confused by this download step in my setup. The link
> in java/testing/README.htm points to:
>
> http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/db2/downloads/jcc/
>
> The link on this page asked me to register myself with IBM, which
> I did, and then took me to
>
>
> http://www14.software.ibm.com/webapp/download/search.jsp?go=y&rs=cloudscape
>
> There are 9 downloads listed on that page, so I went down the list and
> found the thing that looked most likely to me:
>
> 8. Released product: IBM Cloudscape (IBM DB2 JDBC
> Universal Driver, for Cloudscape/Derby)
> IBM Cloudscape V10.1 is a pure, open source-based Java relational
> database management system that can be embedded in Java programs and
> used for online transaction processing (OLTP)
> Operating system: Java, Java2 | Version: 2.4.17 | Size:
> 1.03MB |
> Release date: 04 Oct 2004
>
> This certainly looks like it should be version 2.4.17.
>
> When I clicked on that item, I get a file called db2jcc_for_derby.zip,
> with a readme dated Sep 29, 2004, and jar files dated Aug 24, 2004:
>
> -bash-2.05b$ ls -l /home/bpendleton/downloads/derby/db2jcc/lib
> total 1064
> -r--r--r-- 1 bpendleton users 1077696 Aug 24 2004 db2jcc.jar
> -r--r--r-- 1 bpendleton users 673 Aug 24 2004
> db2jcc_license_c.jar
> -bash-2.05b$
>
> But, as you point out, the Derby Information section in supersimple.diff
> clearly states that I'm running version 1.0 of the driver:
>
> --------- Derby Information --------
> JRE - JDBC: J2SE 1.4.2 - JDBC 3.0
> [/home/bpendleton/src/derby-subversion/trunk/jars/insane/derby.jar]
> 10.2.0.0 alpha - (315052M)
> [/home/bpendleton/src/derby-subversion/trunk/jars/insane/derbytools.jar]
> 10.2.0.0 alpha - (315052M)
> [/home/bpendleton/src/derby-subversion/trunk/jars/insane/derbynet.jar]
> 10.2.0.0 alpha - (315052M)
> [/home/bpendleton/src/derby-subversion/trunk/jars/insane/derbyclient.jar]
> 10.2.0.0 alpha - (315052M)
> [/home/bpendleton/downloads/derby/db2jcc/lib/db2jcc.jar] 1.0 - (581)
> [/home/bpendleton/downloads/derby/db2jcc/lib/db2jcc_license_c.jar] 1.0 -
> (581)
>
>
> So, I guess I'm confused: where did I go wrong, and what do I need
> to do differently?
>
> thanks,
>
> bryan
>
>
Re: POLL: Remove need for DB2 JDBC driver from Derby build and test
Posted by "David W. Van Couvering" <Da...@Sun.COM>.
I'd be happy to fix this, I just thought I'd follow the process, and I
also thought *perhaps* you might want to own this. I do hope you review
what I write and make sure I'm not misstating anything (no that I ever
do *that* :) ).
Cheers,
David
Myrna van Lunteren wrote:
> I'd rather not spend time - making a patch and all that...- on it right
> now. Maybe you can fix it and commit it too?
> (That is, you *are* a committer? Didn't see your name on:
> http://db.apache.org/whoweare.html)
>
> :-)
>
> Myrna
>
> On 11/1/05, *David W. Van Couvering* <David.Vancouvering@sun.com
> <ma...@sun.com>> wrote:
>
> OK, that's good to know. It looks like I and others have been misled
> that we had to pull these jars down to run tests. Note Bryan's recent
> efforts to get these jars -- I think he was just following the
> instructions in BUILDING.txt.
>
> I can log a JIRA to fix the wording in testing/README.htm to make it
> clear that the DB2 driver is optional (and thus the derbynet tests are
> optional).
>
> David
>
> Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
> > David W. Van Couvering wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I hope I'm not stepping on a landmine here, but does anyone else who
> >>thinks it would be a good thing to remove the need for the DB2 JDBC
> >>driver for our builds and tests? It's fine if it's an optional part,
> >>like support for JDK 1.6, but it doesn't seem right that it's
> required
> >>now that we have our own JDBC driver...
> >
> >
> > Dumb question, in what way is it required?
> >
> > I thought it was alredy optional.
> >
> > As far as I know it is not needed for building.
> >
> > As far as I know the derbynet tests will be skipped if it is not
> in the
> > class path.
> >
> > I thought that this had been the case since Derby was open sourced.
> >
> > Dan.
> >
>
>
>
Re: POLL: Remove need for DB2 JDBC driver from Derby build and test
Posted by Myrna van Lunteren <m....@gmail.com>.
I'd rather not spend time - making a patch and all that...- on it right now.
Maybe you can fix it and commit it too?
(That is, you *are* a committer? Didn't see your name on:
http://db.apache.org/whoweare.html)
:-)
Myrna
On 11/1/05, David W. Van Couvering <Da...@sun.com> wrote:
>
> OK, that's good to know. It looks like I and others have been misled
> that we had to pull these jars down to run tests. Note Bryan's recent
> efforts to get these jars -- I think he was just following the
> instructions in BUILDING.txt.
>
> I can log a JIRA to fix the wording in testing/README.htm to make it
> clear that the DB2 driver is optional (and thus the derbynet tests are
> optional).
>
> David
>
> Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
> > David W. Van Couvering wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I hope I'm not stepping on a landmine here, but does anyone else who
> >>thinks it would be a good thing to remove the need for the DB2 JDBC
> >>driver for our builds and tests? It's fine if it's an optional part,
> >>like support for JDK 1.6, but it doesn't seem right that it's required
> >>now that we have our own JDBC driver...
> >
> >
> > Dumb question, in what way is it required?
> >
> > I thought it was alredy optional.
> >
> > As far as I know it is not needed for building.
> >
> > As far as I know the derbynet tests will be skipped if it is not in the
> > class path.
> >
> > I thought that this had been the case since Derby was open sourced.
> >
> > Dan.
> >
>
>
>
Re: POLL: Remove need for DB2 JDBC driver from Derby build and test
Posted by "David W. Van Couvering" <Da...@Sun.COM>.
OK, that's good to know. It looks like I and others have been misled
that we had to pull these jars down to run tests. Note Bryan's recent
efforts to get these jars -- I think he was just following the
instructions in BUILDING.txt.
I can log a JIRA to fix the wording in testing/README.htm to make it
clear that the DB2 driver is optional (and thus the derbynet tests are
optional).
David
Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
> David W. Van Couvering wrote:
>
>
>>I hope I'm not stepping on a landmine here, but does anyone else who
>>thinks it would be a good thing to remove the need for the DB2 JDBC
>>driver for our builds and tests? It's fine if it's an optional part,
>>like support for JDK 1.6, but it doesn't seem right that it's required
>>now that we have our own JDBC driver...
>
>
> Dumb question, in what way is it required?
>
> I thought it was alredy optional.
>
> As far as I know it is not needed for building.
>
> As far as I know the derbynet tests will be skipped if it is not in the
> class path.
>
> I thought that this had been the case since Derby was open sourced.
>
> Dan.
>
Re: POLL: Remove need for DB2 JDBC driver from Derby build and test
Posted by Francois Orsini <fr...@gmail.com>.
I agree - it is easy to get confused between DerbyNet and DerbyNetClient -
maybe DerbyNet should be renamed ;)
On 11/1/05, Myrna van Lunteren <m....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 11/1/05, Daniel John Debrunner <dj...@debrunners.com> wrote:
> >
> > David W. Van Couvering wrote:
> >
> > > I hope I'm not stepping on a landmine here, but does anyone else who
> > > thinks it would be a good thing to remove the need for the DB2 JDBC
> > > driver for our builds and tests? It's fine if it's an optional part,
> > > like support for JDK 1.6, but it doesn't seem right that it's required
> >
> > > now that we have our own JDBC driver...
> >
> > Dumb question, in what way is it required?
> >
> > I thought it was alredy optional.
> >
> > As far as I know it is not needed for building.
> >
> > As far as I know the derbynet tests will be skipped if it is not in the
> > class path.
> >
> > I thought that this had been the case since Derby was open sourced.
> >
> > Dan.
> >
> >
> Yes. However, it's not explicit in the testing/README.htm, and the section
> on setting up the CLASSPATH includes db2jcc.jar. An oversight. We should
> add a ('optional') behind those jars.
> Myrna
>
Re: POLL: Remove need for DB2 JDBC driver from Derby build and test
Posted by Myrna van Lunteren <m....@gmail.com>.
On 11/1/05, Daniel John Debrunner <dj...@debrunners.com> wrote:
>
> David W. Van Couvering wrote:
>
> > I hope I'm not stepping on a landmine here, but does anyone else who
> > thinks it would be a good thing to remove the need for the DB2 JDBC
> > driver for our builds and tests? It's fine if it's an optional part,
> > like support for JDK 1.6, but it doesn't seem right that it's required
> > now that we have our own JDBC driver...
>
> Dumb question, in what way is it required?
>
> I thought it was alredy optional.
>
> As far as I know it is not needed for building.
>
> As far as I know the derbynet tests will be skipped if it is not in the
> class path.
>
> I thought that this had been the case since Derby was open sourced.
>
> Dan.
>
>
Yes. However, it's not explicit in the testing/README.htm, and the section
on setting up the CLASSPATH includes db2jcc.jar. An oversight. We should add
a ('optional') behind those jars.
Myrna
Re: POLL: Remove need for DB2 JDBC driver from Derby build and test
Posted by Daniel John Debrunner <dj...@debrunners.com>.
David W. Van Couvering wrote:
> I hope I'm not stepping on a landmine here, but does anyone else who
> thinks it would be a good thing to remove the need for the DB2 JDBC
> driver for our builds and tests? It's fine if it's an optional part,
> like support for JDK 1.6, but it doesn't seem right that it's required
> now that we have our own JDBC driver...
Dumb question, in what way is it required?
I thought it was alredy optional.
As far as I know it is not needed for building.
As far as I know the derbynet tests will be skipped if it is not in the
class path.
I thought that this had been the case since Derby was open sourced.
Dan.