From samk at twinix.com Sun Apr 12 07:08:14 2009 From: samk at twinix.com (samk at twinix.com) Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 02:08:14 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [fedora-java] Very slow Eclipse on F10 Message-ID: <4802351.01239520095383.JavaMail.SYSTEM@larkin> See Thread at: http://www.techienuggets.com/Detail?tx=70547 Posted on behalf of a User I had exactly the same problem here and managed to reduce it (using strace) to timeouts communicating with another host on our network - which turned out to be configured as the eclipse host's print server in /etc/cups/client.conf. After upgrading the printing configuration "as it should be" - using localhost in /etc/cups/client.conf and setting up browsing in the local cups configuration to automagically attach the printers exported by the network cups server - opening new editors in eclipse became instantaneous. Background: - run: strace -f -tt -o /tmp/eclipse eclipse - reproduce the delay - run: cat /tmp/eclipse | grep AF_INET This will show all network communication performed by eclipse. You'll be looking for 'connect' calls returning EINPROGRESS / EALREADY followed by a delay (cf. time stamps in the second column). HTH. In Response To: Before I file this in bugzilla, I wanted to check if it's just my problem ... Lately, in Eclipse (3.4.1 on Fedora 10), I've been noticing that it takes several seconds to open a new editor. So if I click on a Java source file (in Java perspective), the new tab appears immediately, but it takes several seconds for the actual editor to finish rendering. In the meantime, the tab just says "Java editor". Similar things happen with the Ant buildfile editor. I have several third-party plugins installed that I don't want to remove unless I have to, which is why I wanted to check first -- is anyone else seeing similar symptoms? Thanks, MEF -- Mary Ellen Foster -- http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/mef/ Informatik 6: Robotics and Embedded Systems, Technische Universit??t M??nchen and ICCS, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh -- fedora-devel-java-list mailing list fedora-devel-java-noway at spam.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-java-list From overholt at redhat.com Mon Apr 13 12:54:50 2009 From: overholt at redhat.com (Andrew Overholt) Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 08:54:50 -0400 Subject: [fedora-java] Very slow Eclipse on F10 In-Reply-To: <4802351.01239520095383.JavaMail.SYSTEM@larkin> References: <4802351.01239520095383.JavaMail.SYSTEM@larkin> Message-ID: <20090413125450.GC8321@redhat.com> * samk at twinix.com [2009-04-13 07:07]: > I had exactly the same problem here and managed to reduce it (using > strace) to timeouts communicating with another host on our network - > which turned out to be configured as the eclipse host's print server > in /etc/cups/client.conf. > > After upgrading the printing configuration "as it should be" - using > localhost in /etc/cups/client.conf and setting up browsing in the > local cups configuration to automagically attach the printers exported > by the network cups server - opening new editors in eclipse became > instantaneous. 250528: [printing] Opening of an editor is very slow on machines that see many network printers https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=250528 215234: Investigate enumeratePrinters hang on GTK https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=215234 Andrew From oget.fedora at gmail.com Wed Apr 15 17:11:18 2009 From: oget.fedora at gmail.com (Orcan Ogetbil) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 13:11:18 -0400 Subject: [fedora-java] Drop GCJ AOT bits for F12? Message-ID: Here is the original thread: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-java-list/2008-November/msg00021.html So, shall we or shall we not? * Andrew Haley wrote: > Andrew Overholt wrote: > > > Back when we wrote the initial Java packaging guidelines, we said that > > packagers *should* include GCJ AOT bits. Should we remove this > > requirement for Fedora 11 and beyond? > > > > [...] > > This is a bit premature. We still don't have the OpenJDK JIT for PPC and > ARM arches. We're working hard on it but it's not ready yet for prime-time. > Without the JIT, OpenJDK is crushingly slow on these arches. Any progress on these parts? Orcan From konrad at tylerc.org Wed Apr 15 17:15:09 2009 From: konrad at tylerc.org (Conrad Meyer) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 10:15:09 -0700 Subject: [fedora-java] Drop GCJ AOT bits for F12? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200904151015.10040.konrad@tylerc.org> On Wednesday 15 April 2009 10:11:18 am Orcan Ogetbil wrote: > Here is the original thread: > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-java-list/2008-November/msg000 >21.html > > So, shall we or shall we not? > > * Andrew Haley wrote: > > Andrew Overholt wrote: > > > Back when we wrote the initial Java packaging guidelines, we said that > > > packagers *should* include GCJ AOT bits. Should we remove this > > > requirement for Fedora 11 and beyond? > > > > > > [...] > > > > This is a bit premature. We still don't have the OpenJDK JIT for PPC and > > ARM arches. We're working hard on it but it's not ready yet for > > prime-time. Without the JIT, OpenJDK is crushingly slow on these arches. > > Any progress on these parts? > > > Orcan http://gbenson.net/ <-- That's the guy working on it. It seems to be making a lot of progress, but I don't know if it's ready to ship (probably not?). Regards, -- Conrad Meyer From aph at redhat.com Wed Apr 15 17:21:36 2009 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 18:21:36 +0100 Subject: [fedora-java] Drop GCJ AOT bits for F12? In-Reply-To: <200904151015.10040.konrad@tylerc.org> References: <200904151015.10040.konrad@tylerc.org> Message-ID: <49E617A0.2090409@redhat.com> Conrad Meyer wrote: > On Wednesday 15 April 2009 10:11:18 am Orcan Ogetbil wrote: >> Here is the original thread: >> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-java-list/2008-November/msg000 >> 21.html >> >> So, shall we or shall we not? >> >> * Andrew Haley wrote: >>> Andrew Overholt wrote: >>>> Back when we wrote the initial Java packaging guidelines, we said that >>>> packagers *should* include GCJ AOT bits. Should we remove this >>>> requirement for Fedora 11 and beyond? >>>> >>>> [...] >>> This is a bit premature. We still don't have the OpenJDK JIT for PPC and >>> ARM arches. We're working hard on it but it's not ready yet for >>> prime-time. Without the JIT, OpenJDK is crushingly slow on these arches. >> Any progress on these parts? > > http://gbenson.net/ <-- That's the guy working on it. It seems to be making a > lot of progress, but I don't know if it's ready to ship (probably not?). Lots of progress, not yet ready. Andrew. From overholt at redhat.com Wed Apr 15 17:30:55 2009 From: overholt at redhat.com (Andrew Overholt) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 13:30:55 -0400 Subject: [fedora-java] Drop GCJ AOT bits for F12? In-Reply-To: <49E617A0.2090409@redhat.com> References: <200904151015.10040.konrad@tylerc.org> <49E617A0.2090409@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1239816655.22354.0.camel@vvvvt> On Wed, 2009-04-15 at 18:21 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote: > Conrad Meyer wrote: > > On Wednesday 15 April 2009 10:11:18 am Orcan Ogetbil wrote: > >> Here is the original thread: > >> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-java-list/2008-November/msg000 > >> 21.html > >> > >> So, shall we or shall we not? > >> > >> * Andrew Haley wrote: > >>> Andrew Overholt wrote: > >>>> Back when we wrote the initial Java packaging guidelines, we said that > >>>> packagers *should* include GCJ AOT bits. Should we remove this > >>>> requirement for Fedora 11 and beyond? > >>>> > >>>> [...] > >>> This is a bit premature. We still don't have the OpenJDK JIT for PPC and > >>> ARM arches. We're working hard on it but it's not ready yet for > >>> prime-time. Without the JIT, OpenJDK is crushingly slow on these arches. > >> Any progress on these parts? > > > > http://gbenson.net/ <-- That's the guy working on it. It seems to be making a > > lot of progress, but I don't know if it's ready to ship (probably not?). > > Lots of progress, not yet ready. At what point do we decide to drop gcj bits regardless of the status of Shark? (I'm honestly asking here and not trying to troll) Andrew From aph at redhat.com Wed Apr 15 17:40:48 2009 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 18:40:48 +0100 Subject: [fedora-java] Drop GCJ AOT bits for F12? In-Reply-To: <1239816655.22354.0.camel@vvvvt> References: <200904151015.10040.konrad@tylerc.org> <49E617A0.2090409@redhat.com> <1239816655.22354.0.camel@vvvvt> Message-ID: <49E61C20.9060004@redhat.com> Andrew Overholt wrote: > On Wed, 2009-04-15 at 18:21 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote: >> Conrad Meyer wrote: >>> On Wednesday 15 April 2009 10:11:18 am Orcan Ogetbil wrote: >>>> Here is the original thread: >>>> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-java-list/2008-November/msg000 >>>> 21.html >>>> >>>> So, shall we or shall we not? >>>> >>>> * Andrew Haley wrote: >>>>> Andrew Overholt wrote: >>>>>> Back when we wrote the initial Java packaging guidelines, we said that >>>>>> packagers *should* include GCJ AOT bits. Should we remove this >>>>>> requirement for Fedora 11 and beyond? >>>>>> >>>>>> [...] >>>>> This is a bit premature. We still don't have the OpenJDK JIT for PPC and >>>>> ARM arches. We're working hard on it but it's not ready yet for >>>>> prime-time. Without the JIT, OpenJDK is crushingly slow on these arches. >>>> Any progress on these parts? >>> http://gbenson.net/ <-- That's the guy working on it. It seems to be making a >>> lot of progress, but I don't know if it's ready to ship (probably not?). >> Lots of progress, not yet ready. > > At what point do we decide to drop gcj bits regardless of the status of > Shark? (I'm honestly asking here and not trying to troll) As soon as we want to hurt the people using gcj. Andrew. From ahughes at redhat.com Wed Apr 15 18:07:04 2009 From: ahughes at redhat.com (Andrew John Hughes) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 19:07:04 +0100 Subject: [fedora-java] Drop GCJ AOT bits for F12? In-Reply-To: <49E61C20.9060004@redhat.com> References: <200904151015.10040.konrad@tylerc.org> <49E617A0.2090409@redhat.com> <1239816655.22354.0.camel@vvvvt> <49E61C20.9060004@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20090415180704.GB12633@rivendell.middle-earth.co.uk> On 18:40 Wed 15 Apr , Andrew Haley wrote: > Andrew Overholt wrote: > > On Wed, 2009-04-15 at 18:21 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote: > >> Conrad Meyer wrote: > >>> On Wednesday 15 April 2009 10:11:18 am Orcan Ogetbil wrote: > >>>> Here is the original thread: > >>>> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-java-list/2008-November/msg000 > >>>> 21.html > >>>> > >>>> So, shall we or shall we not? > >>>> > >>>> * Andrew Haley wrote: > >>>>> Andrew Overholt wrote: > >>>>>> Back when we wrote the initial Java packaging guidelines, we said that > >>>>>> packagers *should* include GCJ AOT bits. Should we remove this > >>>>>> requirement for Fedora 11 and beyond? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [...] > >>>>> This is a bit premature. We still don't have the OpenJDK JIT for PPC and > >>>>> ARM arches. We're working hard on it but it's not ready yet for > >>>>> prime-time. Without the JIT, OpenJDK is crushingly slow on these arches. > >>>> Any progress on these parts? > >>> http://gbenson.net/ <-- That's the guy working on it. It seems to be making a > >>> lot of progress, but I don't know if it's ready to ship (probably not?). > >> Lots of progress, not yet ready. > > > > At what point do we decide to drop gcj bits regardless of the status of > > Shark? (I'm honestly asking here and not trying to troll) > > As soon as we want to hurt the people using gcj. > > Andrew. > > -- > fedora-devel-java-list mailing list > fedora-devel-java-list at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-java-list Not to mention that some packages perform better with AOT support than with the OpenJDK JIT, like ecj. -- Andrew :) Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) Support Free Java! Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath http://openjdk.java.net PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (http://subkeys.pgp.net) Fingerprint = F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA 7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8 From choeger at cs.tu-berlin.de Sat Apr 18 11:07:33 2009 From: choeger at cs.tu-berlin.de (Christoph =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=F6ger?=) Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 13:07:33 +0200 Subject: [fedora-java] general maven questions Message-ID: <1240052853.4535.5.camel@choeger6> Hi guys, according to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=429551 rebuilding maven is a mess. While waiting for progress patiently, I have some more general questions about maven in fedora: 1. I see a lot of maven-* packages floating around. How are those supposed to do anything? Doesn't maven download all stuff from the cloud [tm]? 2. If I want to package a maven project, how would I do that? Especially: How do I manage dependencies? 3. Does anyone know if mavens pde plugin is ever going to work again? regards Christoph -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil URL: From overholt at redhat.com Sat Apr 18 12:36:23 2009 From: overholt at redhat.com (Andrew Overholt) Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 08:36:23 -0400 Subject: [fedora-java] general maven questions In-Reply-To: <1240052853.4535.5.camel@choeger6> References: <1240052853.4535.5.camel@choeger6> Message-ID: <20090418123622.GB3487@redhat.com> * Christoph H?ger [2009-04-18 07:08]: > 2. If I want to package a maven project, how would I do that? > Especially: How do I manage dependencies? See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Java/JPPMavenReadme > 3. Does anyone know if mavens pde plugin is ever going to work again? What is this? Andrew From choeger at cs.tu-berlin.de Sat Apr 18 15:21:55 2009 From: choeger at cs.tu-berlin.de (Christoph =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=F6ger?=) Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 17:21:55 +0200 Subject: [fedora-java] general maven questions In-Reply-To: <20090418123622.GB3487@redhat.com> References: <1240052853.4535.5.camel@choeger6> <20090418123622.GB3487@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1240068115.6766.3.camel@choeger6> Am Samstag, den 18.04.2009, 08:36 -0400 schrieb Andrew Overholt: > * Christoph H?ger [2009-04-18 07:08]: > > 2. If I want to package a maven project, how would I do that? > > Especially: How do I manage dependencies? > > See: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Java/JPPMavenReadme > > > 3. Does anyone know if mavens pde plugin is ever going to work again? > > What is this? A plugin which allows one to develop eclipse plugins and features using maven. See: http://mojo.codehaus.org/pde-maven-plugin/index.html Currently it seems to be orphaned upstream, so I will have to subsitute it with some antrunner invocations. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil URL: From oget.fedora at gmail.com Sat Apr 18 23:38:32 2009 From: oget.fedora at gmail.com (Orcan Ogetbil) Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 19:38:32 -0400 Subject: [fedora-java] Packaging toot2 Message-ID: Hi, On the package review of toot2 [1], Alexander pointed me that the source tree contains a few files from the tritonus project [2]. Normally, as the guidelines request, we package every library separately. I would like to ask if an exception can be provided in this case. tritonus is a large project, and packaging it (and its dependencies) is a lot of work (for instance, tritonus contains mp3 encoder/decoders and therefore needs patched) , and I'm not much enthusiastic about packaging it. toot2 contains 5 independent java files (out of ~500) from tritonus. So, can we tolerate these 5 files slipping in? What do you think? Orcan [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492197 [2] http://www.tritonus.org/ From asgeirf at redhat.com Sun Apr 19 22:23:42 2009 From: asgeirf at redhat.com (Asgeir Frimannsson) Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 18:23:42 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [fedora-java] general maven questions In-Reply-To: <1240068115.6766.3.camel@choeger6> Message-ID: <14782364.2461240179815639.JavaMail.asgeirf@localhost.localdomain> ----- "Christoph H?ger" wrote: > Am Samstag, den 18.04.2009, 08:36 -0400 schrieb Andrew Overholt: > > * Christoph H?ger [2009-04-18 07:08]: > > > 3. Does anyone know if mavens pde plugin is ever going to work > again? > > > > What is this? > > A plugin which allows one to develop eclipse plugins and features > using > maven. See: > http://mojo.codehaus.org/pde-maven-plugin/index.html > > Currently it seems to be orphaned upstream, so I will have to > subsitute > it with some antrunner invocations. You might be interested in Tycho, "..the one-stop solution for doing Eclipse and OSGi development with Maven 2..." http://docs.codehaus.org/display/M2ECLIPSE/Tycho+project+overview http://www.sonatype.com/people/2009/04/tycho-implicit-build-target-platform-support-from-maven/ http://www.sonatype.com/people/2009/04/tycho-040-roadmap/ I haven't used Tycho yet, so this is a pointer not a recommendation :) cheers, asgeir From oget.fedora at gmail.com Sun Apr 19 22:22:04 2009 From: oget.fedora at gmail.com (Orcan Ogetbil) Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 18:22:04 -0400 Subject: [fedora-java] Re: Packaging toot2 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 7:38 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: > Hi, > On the package review of toot2 [1], Alexander pointed me that the > source tree contains a few files from the tritonus project [2]. > Normally, as the guidelines request, we package every library > separately. > > I would like to ask if an exception can be provided in this case. > tritonus is a large project, and packaging it (and its dependencies) > is a lot of work (for instance, tritonus contains mp3 encoder/decoders > and therefore needs patched) , and I'm not much enthusiastic about > packaging it. > > toot2 contains 5 independent java files (out of ~500) from tritonus. > So, can we tolerate these 5 files slipping in? What do you think? > Orcan > > [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492197 > [2] http://www.tritonus.org/ > Nevermind. I packaged them. I'd be glad if folks can review and/or comaintain: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496524 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496525 Orcan From sflaniga at redhat.com Tue Apr 28 06:12:50 2009 From: sflaniga at redhat.com (Sean Flanigan) Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 16:12:50 +1000 Subject: [fedora-java] Eclipse p2's artifacts.xml/jar and hard-coded paths Message-ID: <49F69E62.30600@redhat.com> From irc the other day: artifact.xml is simply unusable because it has paths from build time in it and the repo is invalid with only content.xml I can see that artifacts.xml does contain some build-time filesystem paths, but I don't really understand the problem, since Eclipse doesn't seem to care too much. Are there any old discussions about this that I should be reading, instead of bothering the list? I'm interested because I have found that suitably massaged (optional+non-greedy) P2 metadata can help Eclipse to cope with the Babel langpacks and the fragment plugins they contain: https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=256430 So I would like to include the P2 metadata with eclipse-nls (RPMs for the Babel langpacks). 1. Does Eclipse in fact care about these paths? In which case, why does P2 work (occasionally!) on my machine, with completely different filesystem paths? 2. Is there a Fedora packaging rule that says build-time paths are not allowed into packages, perhaps because they make it impossible to reproduce byte-identical builds? 3. Assuming one of the above is true: Could we sed-patch the artifacts.xml file to remove/normalise the build path? 4. Alternatively, would it help if we were to use the P2 director to install eclipse-nls from a local update site, thus installing the features the P2 way, rather than using dropins? Thanks Sean -- Sean Flanigan Senior Software Engineer Engineering - Internationalisation Red Hat -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 551 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From akurtako at redhat.com Tue Apr 28 06:57:57 2009 From: akurtako at redhat.com (Alexander Kurtakov) Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 08:57:57 +0200 Subject: [fedora-java] Eclipse p2's artifacts.xml/jar and hard-coded paths In-Reply-To: <49F69E62.30600@redhat.com> References: <49F69E62.30600@redhat.com> Message-ID: <200904280857.57753.akurtako@redhat.com> On Tuesday 28 April 2009 08:12:50 Sean Flanigan wrote: > From irc the other day: > artifact.xml is simply unusable because it has paths from > build time in it > and the repo is invalid with only content.xml > > I can see that artifacts.xml does contain some build-time filesystem > paths, but I don't really understand the problem, since Eclipse doesn't > seem to care too much. > > Are there any old discussions about this that I should be reading, > instead of bothering the list? > > I'm interested because I have found that suitably massaged > (optional+non-greedy) P2 metadata can help Eclipse to cope with the > Babel langpacks and the fragment plugins they contain: > https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=256430 > > So I would like to include the P2 metadata with eclipse-nls (RPMs for > the Babel langpacks). > > 1. Does Eclipse in fact care about these paths? In which case, why does > P2 work (occasionally!) on my machine, with completely different > filesystem paths? There is a bug in 3.4 which keeps dropins recognized even when artifact.xml is wrong or entirely missing and the folder was processed as if there was an .eclipseextension file in it. But this is fixed so such repo is just marked as invalid with 3.5. > 2. Is there a Fedora packaging rule that says build-time paths are not > allowed into packages, perhaps because they make it impossible to > reproduce byte-identical builds? > 3. Assuming one of the above is true: Could we sed-patch the > artifacts.xml file to remove/normalise the build path? > 4. Alternatively, would it help if we were to use the P2 director to > install eclipse-nls from a local update site, thus installing the > features the P2 way, rather than using dropins? I think that Andrew was working on some scriptlets to use in %post so plugins get installed in the p2 way. This should help fixing the problem Alex > > > Thanks > > Sean From overholt at redhat.com Tue Apr 28 12:32:37 2009 From: overholt at redhat.com (Andrew Overholt) Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 08:32:37 -0400 Subject: [fedora-java] Eclipse p2's artifacts.xml/jar and hard-coded paths In-Reply-To: <49F69E62.30600@redhat.com> References: <49F69E62.30600@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20090428123237.GA3704@redhat.com> * Sean Flanigan [2009-04-28 02:13]: > So I would like to include the P2 metadata with eclipse-nls (RPMs for > the Babel langpacks). That would be cool, but see below. > 1. Does Eclipse in fact care about these paths? It does not. > 2. Is there a Fedora packaging rule that says build-time paths are not > allowed into packages, perhaps because they make it impossible to > reproduce byte-identical builds? Yup. > 3. Assuming one of the above is true: Could we sed-patch the > artifacts.xml file to remove/normalise the build path? We could. Because we're just generating letting the p2 metadata get generated, the only thing we're saving by having it is startup time the first startup after installation. That is, unless the package itself generates custom p2 metadata; I worry about p2 install actions like "chmod" and "mkdir". > 4. Alternatively, would it help if we were to use the P2 director to > install eclipse-nls from a local update site, thus installing the > features the P2 way, rather than using dropins? I've been trying to find a way to do this for the past few weeks but to no avail. The combination of a common bundle pool, a system-wide profile, and the fact that rpm lays down the bits and *then* runs %post/%postun makes it *very* difficult if not impossible to use the director in this way. 3.5 has had a lot of improvements WRT dropins and I've done some tests with it and I think we're in better shape. Andrew