Mailing-List: contact dev-help@felix.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@felix.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of wgedeon@gmail.com designates
 64.233.182.185 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version
         :content-type:references;
        b=f0Dpk4paaDdPB2iyd4FYI5M7yWHZWsxNMzDnckw76Gst3wSYwJL6nz4o4rMyry3STR
         cv2z0dgvY+rU5tqCESXH5gBGNiT6JajS0NVIcnqPKrrlYax7QHIg//j3QhHaTkFiDk5L
         tm2mV4FEDZvC298PltYbAUnmwbd1mOPbR5AU4=
Message-ID: <120de6e60811171117v58ca9220ia7070785bab3166b@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 20:17:30 +0100
From: "Walid \"jo\" Gedeon" <wgedeon@gmail.com>
To: dev@felix.apache.org
Subject: Re: Fragment-Host resolution fails (bug?)
In-Reply-To: <4921B79B.3010003@ungoverned.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_Part_38462_25357091.1226949450809"
References: <120de6e60811170703o7a63b9b2kf3271d1436da4718@mail.gmail.com>
	 <4921B79B.3010003@ungoverned.org>

------=_Part_38462_25357091.1226949450809
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Hello Richard,
> I think the logic is correct. You cannot dynamically attach a fragment to
an already
> resolved host. Thus, the potential hosts for the fragment are only those
that are not
> yet resolved.
Hmm... ok, I wasnt aware of that.

> Are you resolving the host first before installing the fragment?
Yes I am.

So the steps would be:
- install log4j -> Installed
- install config fragment -> Installed
- start config fragment -> Active (log4j now resolved)
- start log4j -> Active.

But what would happen if the host bundle has many fragments?

Thanks,
w

On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 7:27 PM, Richard S. Hall <heavy@ungoverned.org>wrote:

> I think the logic is correct. You cannot dynamically attach a fragment to
> an already resolved host. Thus, the potential hosts for the fragment are
> only those that are not yet resolved.
>
> Are you resolving the host first before installing the fragment?
>
> -> richard
>
> Walid "jo" Gedeon wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> I was struggling to get a fragment installed for log4j configuration,
>> setup as a fragment with host=org.apache.log4j.
>> However, I would keep getting the error:
>>
>> org.osgi.framework.BundleException: Unresolved constraint in bundle 21:
>> host; (bundle-symbolic-name=org.apache.log4j)
>>
>> (bundle 21 is my log4jconfig-fragment), and the log4j bundle (7) seems
>> correctly installed:
>>
>> -> headers 7
>>
>> Apache Jakarta log4j Plug-in (7)
>> --------------------------------
>> Bundle-ClassPath = .
>> Bundle-RequiredExecutionEnvironment = J2SE-1.4
>> Export-Package =
>> org.apache.log4j,org.apache.log4j.chainsaw,org.apache.log4j.config,org.apache.log4j.helpers,org.apache.log4j.jdbc,org.apache.log4j.jmx,org.apac
>>
>> he.log4j.lf5,org.apache.log4j.lf5.config,org.apache.log4j.lf5.util,org.apache.log4j.lf5.viewer,org.apache.log4j.lf5.viewer.categoryexplorer,org.apache.log4j.lf5
>> .viewer.configure,org.apache.log4j.lf5.viewer.images,org.apache.log4j.net<
>> http://org.apache.log4j.net
>> >,org.apache.log4j.nt,org.apache.log4j.or,org.apache.log4j.or.jms,
>> org.apache.log4j.or.sa <http://org.apache.log4j.or.sa>
>>
>> x,org.apache.log4j.spi,org.apache.log4j.varia,org.apache.log4j.xml
>> Bundle-Version = 1.2.13.v200806030600
>> Manifest-Version = 1.0
>> Bundle-Vendor = Eclipse.org
>> Bundle-ManifestVersion = 2
>> Eclipse-BuddyPolicy = registered
>> Bundle-Name = Apache Jakarta log4j Plug-in
>> Bundle-Localization = plugin
>> Bundle-SymbolicName = org.apache.log4j
>>
>> In all case, stepping through the code (in
>> org.apache.felix.framework.searchpolicy.R4SearchPolicyCore), it looks like
>> the boolean checks have been reversed?
>>
>> private List getPotentialHosts(IModule fragment)
>> { // ...
>>        IModule[] modules = m_factory.getModules();
>>        for (int modIdx = 0; (hostReq != null) && (modIdx <
>> modules.length); modIdx++)
>>        {
>>            if (!fragment.equals(modules[modIdx]) &&
>> !isResolved(modules[modIdx])) { ...
>> I'm thinking this should be            if
>> (!fragment.equals(modules[modIdx]) && isResolved(modules[modIdx])) {
>> the host bundle is resolved and it's not the same as the fragment bundle,
>> and can be selected as a potential host:
>>                ICapability[] caps =
>> modules[modIdx].getDefinition().getCapabilities();
>>                for (int capIdx = 0; (caps != null) && (capIdx <
>> caps.length); capIdx++)
>>                {
>>                    if
>> (caps[capIdx].getNamespace().equals(ICapability.HOST_NAMESPACE)
>>                        && hostReq.isSatisfied(caps[capIdx])
>>                        && !modules[modIdx].isStale())
>>                    {
>>                        hostList.add(modules[modIdx]);
>>                        break;
>>                    }
>>                }
>>
>> I've attached a patch for that change... Do you guys agree? or did I
>> misunderstand some part of the logic?
>> I can raise a defect and attach the patch if no one disagrees.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> w
>>
>

------=_Part_38462_25357091.1226949450809--