What are WEB-INF\deploy\<module>\symbolMaps and rpcPolicyManifest directories?

4,404 views
Skip to first unread message

anatoliy

unread,
Apr 5, 2011, 12:01:00 PM4/5/11
to Google Web Toolkit
What are WEB-INF\deploy\<module>\symbolMaps and rpcPolicyManifest
directories?

I found that GWT compiler creates those after each compilation. Total
size of these dirs is now over 150MB for my three modules and this
prevents me to upload the application to App Engine.

Do you know what's purpose of this content? I cannot see any real use
for symbol maps in production application. Especially, I found them to
contain absolute local file paths to source files. Is it possible to
switch this option off?

I noticed this behaviour after upgrading to GWT 2.2, unfortunately I
didn't notice if GWT 2.1 compiler does the same.

Thanks,
Anatoliy

Juan Pablo Gardella

unread,
Apr 5, 2011, 2:55:45 PM4/5/11
to google-we...@googlegroups.com
+1 on this

2011/4/5 anatoliy <anatoliy....@gmail.com>

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group.
To post to this group, send email to google-we...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-web-tool...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.


Thomas Broyer

unread,
Apr 5, 2011, 4:39:27 PM4/5/11
to google-we...@googlegroups.com


On Tuesday, April 5, 2011 6:01:00 PM UTC+2, anatoliy wrote:
What are WEB-INF\deploy\<module>\symbolMaps and rpcPolicyManifest
directories?

I found that GWT compiler creates those after each compilation. Total
size of these dirs is now over 150MB for my three modules and this
prevents me to upload the application to App Engine.

Do you know what's purpose of this content? I cannot see any real use
for symbol maps in production application. Especially, I found them to
contain absolute local file paths to source files.

AFAICT this is to be able to deobfuscate stack traces. Starting with GWT 2.2 (or was it 2.1.1?) you no longer need the -extra param for these (there are now 3 kinds of artifacts: public (put in the "war"), deploy (put in WEB-INF/deploy) and private (put in -extra, if passed)).
 
Is it possible to
switch this option off?

I don't think so, but you can pass the -deploy argument to output them somewhere else (the doc says you can give -deploy the same value as -extra)

targumon

unread,
Jun 27, 2011, 7:38:44 AM6/27/11
to google-we...@googlegroups.com
Faced the same issue.
My project is built using Maven and the solution (workaround?) is through its configuration.
I assume there are equivalent configurations for Ant and whatnot.

<plugin>
<groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
<artifactId>maven-war-plugin</artifactId>
<configuration>
 <packagingExcludes>
WEB-INF/deploy/**
[ , anyOtherResourceToExclude ]
</packagingExcludes>
...
</configuration>
...
</plugin>

cbauer

unread,
Jul 23, 2011, 6:04:34 AM7/23/11
to Google Web Toolkit
Or instead you can just compile these unneeded artifacts outside of
your target WAR:

<plugin>
<groupId>org.codehaus.mojo</groupId>
<artifactId>gwt-maven-plugin</artifactId>
<version>${gwt-maven-plugin-version}</version>
<configuration>
<style>OBFUSCATED</style>
<!--
Can't disable these unneeded artifacts, so
compile
them outside of the target WAR
-->
<deploy>${project.build.directory}/gwt-deploy</
deploy>
</configuration>
</plugin>

maticpetek

unread,
Jul 23, 2011, 7:46:37 AM7/23/11
to google-we...@googlegroups.com
Or ignore in ANT build :

<target name="war" depends="build" description="Create a war file">
<zip destfile="${war.name}">
<fileset dir="war">
<exclude name="WEB-INF/deploy/**"/>
</fileset>
</zip>
</target>

Regards,
   Matic
------------------
GWT stuff twitter  - http://twitter.com/#!/gwtstuff

Jaroslav Záruba

unread,
Mar 11, 2012, 7:41:46 PM3/11/12
to google-we...@googlegroups.com
I wish GPE plugin handled this. The compiler parameters get lost way too easily from "Compile project" dialog window. :(


On Tuesday, April 5, 2011 6:01:00 PM UTC+2, anatoliy wrote:
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages