Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 17291 invoked from network); 20 Mar 2006 18:07:51 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 20 Mar 2006 18:07:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 67425 invoked by uid 500); 20 Mar 2006 18:07:49 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-user-archive@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 67069 invoked by uid 500); 20 Mar 2006 18:07:48 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: user@geronimo.apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list user@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 67028 invoked by uid 99); 20 Mar 2006 18:07:47 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 20 Mar 2006 10:07:47 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.4 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: 67.88.140.227 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of rwallace@thewallacepack.net) Received: from [67.88.140.227] (HELO beluga.contentconnections.com) (67.88.140.227) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 20 Mar 2006 10:07:46 -0800 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by beluga.contentconnections.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAB87461 for ; Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:06:41 -0700 (MST) Received: from beluga.contentconnections.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.contentconnections.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 13028-03 for ; Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:06:39 -0700 (MST) Received: from [172.20.0.123] (unknown [172.20.0.123]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by beluga.contentconnections.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BCC9C686 for ; Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:06:39 -0700 (MST) Message-ID: <441EEF5D.70308@thewallacepack.net> Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:07:25 -0700 From: Richard Wallace User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20051201) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: user@geronimo.apache.org Subject: Re: NoClassDefFoundError deployment errors References: <441AF086.9090703@thewallacepack.net> <6C762BDF-BD26-430F-B14A-658714B162C1@yahoo.com> <5bcc1a120603172201r5947ceb6h2bff9b1f407ec0ff@mail.gmail.com> <74e15baa0603200747r1775815at2d2ae7698deb7f6a@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <74e15baa0603200747r1775815at2d2ae7698deb7f6a@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new 2.3.3 (20050822) at contentconnections.com X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Aaron Mulder wrote: > 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. > > So what should my geronimo-web.xml look like? Right now I've got

org.springframework

/mpl

true

And I'm still getting the commons-logging error? Thanks, Rich > 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 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 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. >>> >> [...] >> >>