tomcat-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Context.xml ignored.
Date Sun, 03 Mar 2013 17:58:02 GMT
On 03/03/2013 16:22, James Green wrote:
> On 3 March 2013 15:51, Mark Thomas <markt@apache.org> wrote:

<snip/>

>> The base file name controls the context path. If you want to change the
>> context path, the simplest solution is to change the base file name.
> 
> Fine. But this is not as described on this page:
> http://tomcat.apache.org/tomcat-7.0-doc/deployer-howto.html
> 
> Here, again, i'm told that META-INF/context.xml provides the context
> descriptor. It also states that dropping the war into webapps/ will consume
> the web application.
> 
> Again, in the FAQ, there holds a reference to this file for deployment
> purposes.

OK. Where on that page does it say that the context.xml file is used to
define the context path? Maybe an explicit statement that this is not
the case is required.

If you look up the configuration for Context elements (which you would
have to do to figure out how to define the context path for a context
element) you will see that there are limitations on when the path
attribute may be used.

> I seem not to be alone in thinking this is the case. A simple Google
> revealed:
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2593472/define-servlet-context-in-war-file
> 
> If you are suggesting that META-INF/context.xml is not used for the
> purposes of defining the context path, then quite a few references need to
> be removed.

Where? I don't believe there are any places in the Tomcat docs where it
is stated that a context path may be configured in a context.xml file.
The docs do state that this is not the case. Perhaps we need to state
this in more places.

Mark


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


Mime
View raw message