geronimo-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <>
Subject Re: What am I doing wrong? EJB Deployment Errors
Date Mon, 11 Jul 2005 00:28:44 GMT
Geronimo (at least theoretically) includes anything you have in the 
manifest classpath... but IIUC this requires you to be deploying an ear 
rather than a standalone ejb module.  Are you deploying an ear and does 
the ejb jar include the correct manifest classpath entry for your 
ejb-client jar?  If so, we probably have a bug.  Showing the ear 
structure and the ejb jar manifest classpath would be helpful.

david jencks

On Jul 10, 2005, at 5:04 PM, wrote:

> Okay, it seems that there are two trains of thought on how to generate 
> an EJB
> jar file. The spec says this (Page 557 of EJB 2.1 Final Release)
> "The EJB specification does not specify whether an ejb-jar file should 
> include
> by copy or by reference the classes that are in an ejb-client JAR 
> file, but
> they must be included either one way or the other. If the by-copy 
> approach is
> used, the producer simply includes all the class files in the 
> ejb-client JAR
> file also in the ejb-jar file. If the by-reference approach is used, 
> the
> ejb-jar file producer does not duplicate the content of the ejb-client 
> JAR file
> in the ejb-jar file, but instead uses a Manifest Class-Path entry in 
> the
> ejb-jar file to specify that the ejb-jar file depends on the 
> ejb-client JAR at
> runtime. The use of the Class-Path entries in the JAR files is 
> explained in the
> Java 2 Platform, Enterprise Edition specification"
> It appears that Eclipse WTP (this generated the EJB Jar for me) is 
> using the
> by-reference approach and Geronimo is reliant on the by-copy approach. 
> So who
> is right? Either way it seems that both are correct, so surely 
> Geronimo needs
> to be able to support both methods?

IIUC we think we do :-)
> Perhaps I will raise this with Eclipse WTP, as I believe this should 
> be an
> option there to generate code correct for the platform you are building
> against, or perhaps the option is there and I am misunderstanding. 
> There
> appears to be a number of problems with their tutorials that has lead 
> to this
> problem arising.

I would think they would want to support both.
> Should I sending these problems to the developler list in future?
I think the user list is fine until we are sure we have a problem.

david jencks

> Quoting Jacek Laskowski <>:
>> David Jencks wrote:
>>> you need to include all the interfaces for the bean in the ejb jar, 
>>> not
>>> just the optional ejb client jar.  We actually ignore the client jar 
>>> if
>>> you specify it.
>> By the way, how should we treat the information? Should it influence 
>> the
>> bean's classpath? I see I'll have to read about it in the EJB spec.
>>> david jencks
>> Jacek
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

View raw message