geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From anita kulshreshtha <a_kuls...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: console & deployer dependencies
Date Tue, 12 Sep 2006 13:56:20 GMT
   Nop.. I tried deploying MYSQL DBPool using the wizard. The
deployment was successful, but I got a stack trace. There was a stack
trace during shutdown (see the attached log). So I decided to get the
latest source. I have been getting openejb (rev 2897) compile failures
due to: 
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2354
    I will give it a try again later today.

    Did everything deploy cleanly for you?

Thanks
Anita

--- Bill Dudney <bdudney@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi Anita,
> 
> Any luck? Any further thoughts? I'm happy to help in anyway I can to 
> 
> get this resolved.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> -bd-
> 
> On Sep 6, 2006, at 8:31 PM, anita kulshreshtha wrote:
> 
> > inline..
> >
> > --- Bill Dudney <bdudney@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Anita,
> >>
> >> initial patch? The patch I posted had a single deleted line from
> each
> >>
> >> pom.
> >
> >    If it does not break anything else, I am OK with it. You should
> > delete o/a/g/configs directory in .m2 repo, and build all the
> configs.
> >
> >
> > Just trying to understand the question.
> >>
> >> On the j2ee-deployer being added; That was a result of other
> issues
> >> with dependencies being missed. Starting with (I believe)
> >>
> >> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2326
> >
> >      Thanks for the info. It is indeed a lot.. I will get back to
> you.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Anita
> >>
> >> There were many many problems solved by adding that parent config
> >> without causing other issues. I believe the whole conversation
> took
> >> place in that JIRA so hopefully there is enough info there to
> inform
> >>
> >> you.
> >>
> >> As to the #2 issue/question I'm not sure, but from my current
> vantage
> >>
> >> point with more experience of car stacking perhaps getting the
> >> tomcat-
> >> deployer config correct would fix both 2326 & this issue.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> -bd-
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sep 6, 2006, at 9:58 AM, anita kulshreshtha wrote:
> >>
> >>> Bill,
> >>>    The webconsole-tomcat config differs from the original patch.
> To
> >>> answer your question correctly, I need to understand  why:
> >>> 1. The j2ee-deployer config was added as a parent configuration.
> >>> 2. The tomcat-deployer config was changed so that tomcat config
> is
> >> not
> >>> a parent of tomcat-deployer config.
> >>>    I am searching the archives/jiras. I need to do some testing..
> >>>
> >>> Thanks
> >>> Anita
> >>>
> >>> --- Bill Dudney <bdudney@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Anita,
> >>>>
> >>>> While the jar's are not required in the class loader, without
> them
> >>>> the warning messages are printed.
> >>>>
> >>>> Do you have ideas about how to get rid of the warning messages
> and
> >>>> keep the 'provided' scope?
> >>>>
> >>>> I think I prefer pushing all the methods into the 'super
> >> interface'
> >>>> and having an UnsupportedOperationException as long as there are
> >> good
> >>>>
> >>>> error messages as to what has happened (i.e. 'a method was
> invoked
> >> on
> >>>>
> >>>> the Jetty container that is not supported, perhaps you wanted to
> >> use
> >>>>
> >>>> Tomcat instead?' or something less cheesy).
> >>>>
> >>>> Anyway I'm not sure of the best way to handle this but I don't
> >> like
> >>>> the warning messages. I think they would look ominous to initial
> >>>> users then over time users would stop worrying about warning
> >>>> messages. Which is bad IMO.
> >>>>
> >>>> TTFN,
> >>>>
> >>>> -bd-
> >>>>
> >>>> On Sep 5, 2006, at 8:23 AM, anita kulshreshtha wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> I'm not sure what the point is of listing it as "provided",
if
> >>>> that's
> >>>>>> what we're currently doing.  I'm pretty sure it's not
> "provided"
> >>>> so
> >>>>>> we
> >>>>>> might as well either not list it or list it as a regular
> >>>> dependency.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>      The scope=provided is used to enforce the build order for
> >> the
> >>>>> configs, i.e the console configs are not built before the
> >>>> jetty/tomcat
> >>>>> deployer configs are built in a multi config build. These cars
> >> are
> >>>> not
> >>>>> required in the classloader.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks
> >>>>> Anita
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 9/4/06, Bill Dudney <bdudney@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Hi All,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The consoles (tomcat & jetty) are spewing warning
messages
> >> like
> >>>>>> this;
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> 08:00:18,511 WARN  [BasicProxyManager] Could not
load
> >> interface
> >>>>>>>>> org.apache.geronimo.jetty.JettyWebAppContext in
provided
> >>>>>> ClassLoader
> >>>>>>>>> for
> >> org.apache.geronimo.configs/welcome-jetty/1.2-SNAPSHOT/car?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> J2EEApplication=null,j2eeType=WebModule,name=org.apache.geronimo.conf
> >>>>>>>>> igs
> >>>>>>>>> /welcome-jetty/1.2-SNAPSHOT/car
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> To fix it we can simply remove the <scope>provided</scope>
> >> from
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>> <artifactId>{jetty,tomcat}-deployer</artifactId>
> dependencies
> >>>> in
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>> webconsole-{jetty,tomcat}/pom.xml.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Could someone who knows more about the console than
me
> please
> >>>>>> review
> >>>>>>>>> the patch (GERONIMO-2344.bdudney-2.patch) here;
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2344
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> And apply it if it makes sense?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Thanks!
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> -bd-
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> __________________________________________________
> >>>>> Do You Yahoo!?
> >>>>> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> >>>>> http://mail.yahoo.com
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> __________________________________________________
> >>> Do You Yahoo!?
> >>> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> >>> http://mail.yahoo.com
> 
=== message truncated ===

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
Mime
View raw message