Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add relx configuration for Riak. #965

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

cmeiklejohn
Copy link
Contributor

@cmeiklejohn cmeiklejohn commented Mar 31, 2019

Add a configuration for relx that uses the rebar3 cuttlefish plugin for properly building the configurations required schema files.

Cuttlefish compilation is still preventing the node from starting because cuttlefish doesn't run escript using the application libraries. Therefore, any schema file that references a library in lib -- for instance, the Riak KV files reference a function in riak_core_throttle that is unavailable for cuttlefish unless the application libraries are loaded.

Another issue here is that in the configuration that uses a cd dirname $0 && /bin/pwd to derive the release path. This is a problem because relx uses the escape functionality of mustache to conver this && to & -- this is not a valid unix command. Since there is no known way to prevent this escaping of a literal, this has been replaced by a ; under the assumption that the directory change to dirname $0 command will not fail.

Before this can be merged, the following issue has to be addressed:
vernemq/rebar3_cuttlefish#35

cc: @martincox @martinsumner

Add a configuration for relx that uses the rebar3 cuttlefish plugin for properly building the configurations required schema files.
@llelf
Copy link
Contributor

llelf commented Mar 31, 2019

Another issue here is that in the configuration that uses a cd dirname $0 && /bin/pwd to derive the release path. This is a problem because relx uses the escape functionality of mustache to conver this && to & -- this is not a valid unix command.

if cd "`dirname "$E"`"; then pwd; fi

?

@cmeiklejohn
Copy link
Contributor Author

It would need an else branch, and I'm not sure what's safe to use there?

@llelf
Copy link
Contributor

llelf commented Mar 31, 2019

It doesn't need else, it is practically the same as &&.

@ThomasArts
Copy link
Contributor

This is outdated. We now have a release build in place.

@ThomasArts ThomasArts closed this May 10, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants