Return-Path: 
 <users-return-214566-apmail-tomcat-users-archive=tomcat.apache.org@tomcat.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-users-archive@www.apache.org
Received: (qmail 2970 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2010 14:48:53 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3)
  by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 9 Jul 2010 14:48:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 59757 invoked by uid 500); 9 Jul 2010 14:48:49 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-users-archive@tomcat.apache.org
Received: (qmail 59652 invoked by uid 500); 9 Jul 2010 14:48:49 -0000
Mailing-List: contact users-help@tomcat.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:users-help@tomcat.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:users@tomcat.apache.org>
List-Id: <users.tomcat.apache.org>
Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <users@tomcat.apache.org>
Delivered-To: mailing list users@tomcat.apache.org
Received: (qmail 59643 invoked by uid 99); 9 Jul 2010 14:48:49 -0000
Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 09 Jul 2010 14:48:49 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0
	tests=SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Received: from [88.198.36.7] (HELO mail2.ddt-consult.de) (88.198.36.7)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 09 Jul 2010 14:48:39 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mail2.ddt-consult.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54B3E400246
	for <users@tomcat.apache.org>; Fri,  9 Jul 2010 16:48:19 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail
Received: from mail2.ddt-consult.de ([127.0.0.1])
	by localhost (mail2.ddt-consult.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with LMTP id WhjgcxNS1VkZ for <users@tomcat.apache.org>;
	Fri,  9 Jul 2010 16:48:18 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.2.115] (p4FFE1E35.dip.t-dialin.net [79.254.30.53])
	(Authenticated sender: mks@list-post.mks-mail.de)
	by mail2.ddt-consult.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5443E40022C
	for <users@tomcat.apache.org>; Fri,  9 Jul 2010 16:48:18 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <4C3736B1.8010902@list-post.mks-mail.de>
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 16:48:17 +0200
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Markus_Sch=F6nhaber?=
 <tomcat-users@list-post.mks-mail.de>
Reply-To: users@tomcat.apache.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; de;
 rv:1.9.2.6pre) Gecko/20100625 Thunderbird/3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: users@tomcat.apache.org
Subject: Re: Error: Invalid or unreadable WAR file : error in opening zip
 file
References: <9061C176-007C-4804-9D65-88ABE2486B1B@consultorpc.com>
 <99C8B2929B39C24493377AC7A121E21F98FBA37A35@USEA-EXCH8.na.uis.unisys.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <99C8B2929B39C24493377AC7A121E21F98FBA37A35@USEA-EXCH8.na.uis.unisys.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org

09.07.2010 15:38, Caldarale, Charles R:

>> From: Fernando Morgenstern [mailto:fernando@consultorpc.com]
>> Subject: Error: Invalid or unreadable WAR file : error in opening zip
>> file
>>
>> I'm running the following version of tomcat:
>>
>> Server version: Apache Tomcat/6.0-snapshot
>> Server built:   Nov 15 2009 11:02:53
>> Server number:  6.0.0.0
> 
> That is not a good version number for Tomcat, being many, many years old.

Not necessarily that old - the "Server built" seems to indicate that
it's roughly 9 month.
To me, this looks like a Tomcat built from source. IIRC the
build.properties.default does set the various version.<foo> properties
like that (version.suffix is "-dev" not "-snapshot" nowadays, though).

> That makes the rest of the report extremely suspect.

Seconded. At least it should be tested if a recent official Tomcat
binary shows the same behaviour.

-- 
Regards
  mks

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org