Mailing-List: contact users-help@felix.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@felix.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of david.bosschaert@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.160.49 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <500EB46A.4000902@ungoverned.org>
References: 
 <CAHL_zcM4+OOJBr3FrCUM5A0g4TS5SLg1mreXLQDzTWbvQ5+YTA@mail.gmail.com>
 <500EAB56.5020804@ungoverned.org>
 <CAHL_zcMAw4m5bWQNfeXtsYZQJvRO6EUBEyOhqWQ+XQaryWXCuA@mail.gmail.com>
 <500EB46A.4000902@ungoverned.org>
From: David Bosschaert <david.bosschaert@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 16:11:02 +0100
Message-ID: 
 <CAMit8Sp719YyaUZDjZA0hoYmuMZi7BaJtPKXCrq+Mn1EJkDrjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: OSGi 4.3 and Felix 4.0: is PackageAdmin.refreshPackages()
 obsolete?
To: users@felix.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On 24 July 2012 15:42, Richard S. Hall <heavy@ungoverned.org> wrote:
>
> On 7/24/12 10:16 , Christopher BROWN wrote:
>>
>> Hi Richard,
>>
>> Looking at:
>>
>> http://www.osgi.org/javadoc/r4v43/core/org/osgi/framework/Bundle.html#adapt(java.lang.Class)
>>
>> ...I don't see any specific mention of the special case for the system
>> bundle.  Of course, I don't doubt it :-)  but is this detailed somewhere?
>
>
> Yeah, I know, it sucks. This is one of the reasons I was against this whole
> "adapt()" approach, but people didn't listen to me. :-)
>
> Checkout the documentation for FrameworkWiring...

FYI - I added a bug for this to the OSGi bugzilla:
https://www.osgi.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=149

Best regards,

David

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org