geronimo-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Aaron Mulder" <ammul...@alumni.princeton.edu>
Subject Re: NoClassDefFoundError deployment errors
Date Mon, 20 Mar 2006 15:47:06 GMT
To the original poster:

You actually need *Spring* in your hidden classes element.  I believe
everything will work if you just list Spring alone (e.g.
org.springframework) and not Faces, Hibernate, or Commons Logging. 
It's possible that you might need commons logging listed as well, but
I think once you're using the right Spring, it will get beyond the
commons logging problem.

To Brill:

It wouldn't break my heart to see Geronimo default to the spec
behavior for class loading.  I'm not sure that would solve this
problem (e.g. if the class is already loaded it may not load it
*again* from the web app loader), but I'd have to check the spec to be
sure.

To David J:

I'd still like to see applications on a class loader that has only the
spec classes as a parent and not the Geronimo implementation classes. 
That is, we have a CL with all the spec JARs, with one child for the
server code and a separate child for the application code.  Previously
I think you've said "it might work but we'd need to try it to be sure"
-- I'll try to experiment with this once the SVN tree stabilizes a
bit.

Thanks,
    Aaron

On 3/18/06, Brill Pappin <johnpappin@gmail.com> wrote:
> Isn't that non-standard?
> I mean, Geronimo should be prefering the libs in the WAR over its own
> libs. I thought that was part of the spec for webapps.
>
> I've been having the same trouble myself, and its contrary to what I
> expect having used a veriety of other app servers. Geronimo should not
> be causing my application to blow up because of library conflicts.
>
> I do think its ability to share libs easily is good, but I think the
> default should be to isolate the webapp and allow sharing to be turned
> on via the geronimo config xml file.
>
> Does anyone know why Geronimo is so loose with its classloaders? Was
> this a design choice or an artifact of some other issue?
>
> If it was a design choice, I would *really* like to see the
> justification for it... and if an artifact, it needs to be corrected
> ASAP.
>
> - Brill Pappin
>
> On 3/17/06, David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com> wrote:
> [...]
> > My first guess is that a copy of spring included in geronimo is
> > getting used in your web app instead of the copy you are trying to
> > use: when our copy tries to load the faces/hibernate classes it can't
> > find them.  If this is the problem you should be able to fix it by
> > adding spring and hibernate to the hidden classes list in your
> > geronimo plan for your application.
> [...]
>

Mime
View raw message