@eyedeekay
&eche|on
&kytv
&zzz
+R4SAS
+RN
+RN_
+dr|z3d
+hk
+orignal
+postman
+weko
+wodencafe
An0nm0n
Arch
Dann
DeltaOreo
FreefallHeavens
Irc2PGuest29173
Irc2PGuest46214
Irc2PGuest59134
Irc2PGuest65329
Irc2PGuest69240
Irc2PGuest74757
Leopold_
Nausicaa
Onn4l7h
Onn4|7h
Over
Sisyphus
Sleepy
SoniEx2
T3s|4_
acetone_
anon4
b3t4f4c3__
bak83_
boonst
cumlord
dr4wd3
eyedeekay_bnc
l337s
not_bob_afk
poriori
profetikla
qend-irc2p
r3med1tz-
radakayot
rapidash
scottpedia
shiver_
solidx66
syncthing2
tr
trust_
u5657
uop23ip
w8rabbit
x74a6
zzz
eyedeekay, heads up, you're going to have to update izpack before the next release to fix github issue #86
zzz
this is a 2 month old serious bug that hasn't been, you should have seen it as part of your 2.7.0 release checklist prep process and hollered
zzz
so we're still failing on spying github tickets promptly
zzz
current izpack release is 2.5.3, I've done some brief testing after building it, I couldn't find an official binary
zzz
I'll have a binary up and instructions if you plan to build it yourself
zzz
allow plenty of time for build/install/test between now and our release
zzz
do you do installer5 builds in any of our CI? (probably not?)
eyedeekay
No I don't have installer5 builds in CI, the furthest I make the CI go packaging-wise is generating i2pupdate.zip's, but I can add a new target on top of that one and it should work fine
eyedeekay
*.zips
zzz
well installer5 requires you to have the 90 MB izpack 5 installed separately, so it might be misery
zzz
that's why izpack 4 ("installer" target) is generally fine since we bundle that
zzz
but it's fugly on linux
zzz
anyway there's no way this ticket should have gone unnoticed, it was posted a week before the 2.7.0 release and we should have investigated before then
eyedeekay
Sorry about not seeing it. I think I can make them more visible to myself by making the github CI assign new issues to me automatically instead of needing to go through notifications
eyedeekay
Or I could have it auto-assign them to you, or we can split them down the middle
eyedeekay
As for CI builds with IzPack5 I'm going to give it a shot
zzz
you're the github guy, why don't you take them first
eyedeekay
Can do
zzz
I wouldn't bother with the CI, and among other issues izpack doesn't post official release binaries
zzz
the build from source was an adventure
zzz
give me a few minutes and I'll post my notes
zzz
OK if I bump to -3 because you're going to need that first
eyedeekay
Yes feel free to bump to -3
zzz
ok here we go
dr|z3d
re izpack4..
dr|z3d
have you tried building an installer using it on any version of java that doesn't have pack200?
dr|z3d
if you had, you'd probably have noticed by now that it's broken. fortunately there's a fix, a custom izpack4 jar that has the pack200 code compiled in.
dr|z3d
git.skank.i2p/i2pplus/I2P.Plus/src/branch/master/installer/lib/izpack/standalone-compiler.jar
dr|z3d
from our perspective, I don't see a huge advantage of 5 over 4. 5 supports html in the installer screens, didn't notice anything else different.