tomcat-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Debbie Shapiro <DShap...@cardiacscience.com>
Subject RE: Web service not starting up as expected
Date Mon, 12 Mar 2012 17:40:36 GMT

-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:chris@christopherschultz.net] 
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2012 9:09 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Web service not starting up as expected


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Debbie,

On 3/9/12 5:56 PM, Debbie Shapiro wrote:
> -----Original Message----- From: André Warnier
> [mailto:aw@ice-sa.com]
>> Now wait.. I am not so familiar with these Windows commands, but
>> do I see above a) a command to stop the Tomcat service b) a
>> command killing java.exe ?
> 
> Yes. This code is sort of a holdover from another application that
> I could only kill the service by also killing the java.exe
> processes that it was tied to, otherwise it couldn't obtain the
> port because it was already in use. Probably not necessary for this
> application, but I figured it couldn't hurt.

It *can* hurt: what about any other Java processes that are running?

This is a dedicated server that is only running this process. There should be only the one
java process running.


>> REM delay batch job to wait for services to stop
>> 
>> for /F "tokens=1-4 delims=/- " %%A in ('date/T') do set
>> DATE=%%B%%C%%D for /F "tokens=1-4 delims=:., " %%a in ('time/T')
>> do set TIME=%%a%%b%%c
>> 
>> cd c:\"Program Files"\"Apache Software Foundation"\"Tomcat
>> 7.0"\webapps\sree\WEB-INF\classes rename sree.log
>> %DATE%_%TIME%_sree.log rename schedule.log
>> %DATE%_%TIME%_schedule.log
>> 
>> cd c:\"Program Files"\"Apache Software Foundation"\"Tomcat
>> 7.0"\webapps\sree\WEB-INF\classes compact %DATE%_%TIME%_sree.log
>> /c compact %DATE%_%TIME%_schedule.log /c
>> 
> 
> and c) a series of command tending to indicate that this
> application puts its logfiles inside the "classes" directory ?
> (not fatal, but at least bizarre)
> 
> Yes, it does. This is the way the vendor coded it. I have brought
> it to their attention but they don't seem to see a problem with
> it.

Idiots.

Yes, well, unfortunately, I can't force them to change how this is coded. 

- -chris
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk9eH4AACgkQ9CaO5/Lv0PCXTQCfSWLx0kzneT+PTnL2ZQs/ygs2
WlIAnRHlaN7hcWnIcXif9xIGQRlY72FG
=G+vp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


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


Mime
View raw message