directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Karasulu <>
Subject Re: TRIPLESEC various little problems
Date Thu, 28 Dec 2006 13:33:33 GMT
Hi David,

Comments in line ...

David Jencks wrote:
> I'm running into a few more problems and questions....
> 1. The wiki page
> seems to indicate that some triplesec developers think that jdk 1.4.2
> compatibility should be maintained for a while longer.  Not knowing this
> my patches have used lots of jdk 1.5 features, mostly generics.  I can't
> find any discussion of this decision on the mailing list (doesn't mean
> it's not there :-).  So, I propose we move to jdk 1.5 and ask those
> wanting to run on 1.4 to use retrotranslator.  BTW I didn't look far but
> it looks to me as if apache harmony has a UUID implementation.

Yeah don't worry about 1.4 compatibility.  The community has moved on to

> 2. After lots of successful builds I discovered -Pintegration and
> started running into failures.  I find the integration tests don't take
> very long so  I'd recommend reversing the default and having to use
> -Pquick or -Pno-integration for a faster build.  

Interesting idea.  It might catch more of our issues if it is the
default since the integration tests will more thoroughly test the server.

I wonder what others might think of this as well.  I know many expresses
their disdain with integration tests taking so long.  This is why I did
not run them on the default.

I've had 2 sets of
> problems:
> a.  The store tests failed AFAICT from mismatched shared-ldap
> libraries.  The ldif files were not getting read in at all.  Eventually
> I gave up trying to understand which jars were being used and debug
> through those jars and switched to apacheds 1.5.0-SNAPSHOT and shared
> 0.9.6-SNAPSHOT at which point these tests started passing.

Ok we may have a library issue.  Currently Tsec is setup to depend on
ApacheDS 1.0 released jars.  The ldap and other shared libs are setup to
use release versions for 1.0.  You should use this version.

> b. The guardian-ldap LdapApplicationPolicyIntegrationTest tests have
> failures.  Normally I get 3/7 failures.  However if I add a sleep here:
>     protected void setUp() throws Exception
>     {
>         super.setUp();
>         Thread.sleep(500);
>         Properties props = new Properties();
> I sometimes get more failures:  Tests run: 7, Failures: 1, Errors: 6,
> Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 8.809 sec <<< FAILURE!
> I've been unable  to figure out what is supposed to be happening and
> what is happening.

Hmmm I have to start debugging things to help you here.

> 3. I can't say I've looked very hard but it's not at all clear to me
> what the embedded jetty instance is doing.  Whatever it is, to use
> triplesec in an app server, I think we'd want to run under the app
> servers web container.  Is this currently configurable in some way that
> I've missed?

The Jetty instance is there for the web based initial configuration of
triplesec.  However this need not be used if triplesec is configured
programatically.  Only the standalone version should be using this
feature.  If it is not doing this now we can correct it.

So you don't even need jetty when embedding.

> 4. The installer build fails for me.... and it's not too clear what's
> needed to run triplesec without the installer.
> I'd be particularly interested to know if the integration profile builds
> for anyone else and if the installer build works for anyone.

It used to before the move when we released 0.7.1 which was the last
release of tsec.  Things are a bit in shambles right now.  I will try to
get things in order sometime within the next few days if you don't beat
me to it.


View raw message