On Dec 4, 2011, at 6:52, Michael McCandless <luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Michael McCandless > <luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote: >> On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Andi Vajda <va...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, 2 Dec 2011, Michael McCandless (Commented) (JIRA) wrote: >>> >>>> RE the exception inside createComponents... strange! Your exception >>>> indeed has all the details (ie, shows the original traceback, from the >>>> createComponents method). >>>> >>>> Yet, when I do exactly that change (stick the x in, then run the test case >>>> directly, I get this: >>> >>> Did you build your lucene module with --shared (and did you build jcc with >>> shared enabled, the default normally). It occurred to me that exception >>> reporting is a bit weaker in non shared mode because the PythonException >>> java class is not present. Just a thought... >> >> Hmm, I believe I built jcc with the defaults (shared), but indeed I >> did not build the lucene extension shared... I'll try to build shared >> and see if that fixes the exception reporting! If so, maybe we should >> note this limitation of non-shared... > > Hmm I went and built the lucene extension shared (added --shared to > the command-line passed to jcc module, in the topelevel Makefile) but > I still don't get the traceback inside Python... spooky. > > Just to be certain: how can I validate I truly succeeded in shared > linking for the lucene extension...? I'm on linux... when I run "nm" > on the _lucene.so, what should I look for to confirm I "succeeded"...? Use ldd (with the right flag) on _lucene.so, it should depend on libjcc.so if built shared. Andi.. > > Mike McCandless > > http://blog.mikemccandless.com
