geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Aaron Mulder" <>
Subject Re: war manifest classpath in ear (GERONIMO-2125)
Date Tue, 11 Jul 2006 15:03:34 GMT
What if the WAR is in a subdir within the EAR like foo/bar/some.war?
Then ".." alone won't work to resolve paths relative to the EAR.

I would think from a WAR-in-EAR, we could identify the Module ID of
the EAR, and then use the repo to construct a path to the JAR-in-EAR
with the EAR module ID and the JAR path.  Is there a reason why that
wouldn't work?


On 7/10/06, David Jencks <> wrote:
> I've finally managed to reproduce the problem in GERONIMO-2125, in
> which you have an ear, with a war inside, with a manifest classpath,
> and the stuff on the mcp doesn't work.
> The problem is pretty much caused by our new configuration for the
> war, although I think a similar problem would occur for an exploded
> ejb jar in an ear. ( I suspect the latter doesn't work at all now,
> since in that case we should manually add the mcp entries to the cp,
> which we don't)
> so, we a uri out of the mcp, and try to resolve it against the war
> config base uri, such as web.war, and add it to the config classpath,
> so we get e.g. an entry of jar.jar.  However, this is relative to the
> war config, which does not have this jar in it: it's actually in the
> containing ear config, typically up one directory.
> e.g.
> ear config is at
> /Users/david/geronimo/svn/geronimo/trunk/assemblies/j2ee-jetty-server/
> target/geronimo-1.2-SNAPSHOT/repository/default/ear-1.0-SNAPSHOT/
> 1152577205326/
> war config inside it is at
> /Users/david/geronimo/svn/geronimo/trunk/assemblies/j2ee-jetty-server/
> target/geronimo-1.2-SNAPSHOT/repository/default/ear-1.0-SNAPSHOT/
> 1152577205326/
> the mcp entry should be
> ../jar.jar
> or we need to copy another copy of the jar.jar into the war
> configuration.
> I'm in favor of relativizing the mcp entry to ../jar.jar but I'm a
> little worried about the consequences.  Anyone see any problems with
> this?
> thanks
> david jencks

View raw message