Will definitely test this out. Thanks a lot. I assume everything is checked in?
/Bengt Den 4 dec 2013 16:09 skrev "Guillaume Nodet" <[email protected]>: > Both are parts of the game. > The order actually was significant as shown by the test case mainly because > of the order difference between the java util Properties object and the > felix Properties object. The first one is relies on a Hashtable while the > second relies on a LinkedHashMap. > This is significant because of the way the substitution was done. > if you start from a = $\{var}, ab = ${a}b, abc = ${ab}c > you had the following steps: > a = $\{var}, ab = ${a}b, abc = ${ab}c > a = $\{var}, ab = ${var}b, abc = ${ab}c > a = $\{var}, ab = ${var}b, abc = bc > The reason is that substitution were done using already substituted > variables, so when computing ${ab}c, it was using > ${ab}c > ${var}bc > bc > instead of > ${ab}c > ${a}bc > $\{var}bc > ${var}bc > So the problem wan't really the order of the values, but the fact that the > substitution was done using already substituted values, which then made the > order significant. > > Note that the result is now (and irrespective of the order of the lines): > a = ${var}, ab = ${var}b, abc = ${var}bc > > So I think the escaping is now more deterministic. Please give it some > testing and let me know if you still have problems in this area. > > 2013/12/4 Bengt Rodehav <[email protected]> > > > BTW. I did some experimenting with declaring the properties in different > > order in the configuration file. It did not seem to matter. I was under > the > > impression that the recursive variable substitution is what makes it > > non-deterministic. > > > > If a property has been evaluated already it should not be evaluated again > > because another layer of the escape characters will then be removed. > > > > /Bengt > > > > > > 2013/12/4 Bengt Rodehav <[email protected]> > > > > > OK. > > > > > > > > > 2013/12/4 Guillaume Nodet <[email protected]> > > > > > >> Unfortunately, it does not seem to be sufficient, I'm investigating > > >> further > > >> > > >> > > >> 2013/12/4 Bengt Rodehav <[email protected]> > > >> > > >> > I noticed that you seem to have fixed the issues I had reported > > >> Guillaume. > > >> > Thanks a lot! Looking forward to the next release. > > >> > > > >> > /Bengt > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > 2013/12/2 Bengt Rodehav <[email protected]> > > >> > > > >> > > Thanks Guillaume! > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > 2013/12/2 Guillaume Nodet <[email protected]> > > >> > > > > >> > >> I'll try to have a look at those today or tomorrow. > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> 2013/12/2 Bengt Rodehav <[email protected]> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > I've replaced FELIX-4332 with FELIX-4338 and FELIX-4339. > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > I have attached a patch for FELIX-4338 and hope that someone > can > > >> have > > >> > a > > >> > >> > look at it and possibly commit it. > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > FELIX-4339 is trickier but I would appreciate a discussion > about > > >> how > > >> > >> this > > >> > >> > should be handled. > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > /Bengt > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > 2013/11/29 Bengt Rodehav <[email protected]> > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > I've tested more with the proposed change in order to stop > > >> > >> FileInstall to > > >> > >> > > incorrectly change the contents of the configuration file > > >> (problem > > >> > b) > > >> > >> > from > > >> > >> > > my previous post). It seems to work fine. I would really like > > >> that > > >> > to > > >> > >> be > > >> > >> > > fixed. Would you like me to create a patch atttached to the > > JIRA? > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > Problem a) is probably not trivial to fix. I've experimented > a > > >> lot > > >> > and > > >> > >> > > it's very hard for me to foresee how many escape characters I > > >> need > > >> > in > > >> > >> > > different circumstances. One real life example for me is how > I > > >> > >> configure > > >> > >> > an > > >> > >> > > integration service that uses a Camel route underneath. If I > > put > > >> the > > >> > >> > > followiing contents in a test.cfg file: > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > *mydir=C:/temp* > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > *timestampedfile=$\\\\{file:onlyname\\\\}-$\\\\{date:now:yyyyMMddHHmmssSSS\\\\}.$\\\\{file:ext\\\\}* > > >> > >> > > > > >> *move=${mydir}/archive/$\\{date:now:yyyyMMdd\\}/${timestampedfile}* > > >> > >> > > *moveFailed=${mydir}/failed/${timestampedfile}* > > >> > >> > > *fromUri=file:${mydir}?move=${move}&moveFailed=${moveFailed}* > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > And execute the following command: > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > *config:list "(service.pid=test)"* > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > I get the following output: > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> *----------------------------------------------------------------* > > >> > >> > > *Pid: test* > > >> > >> > > *BundleLocation: null* > > >> > >> > > *Properties:* > > >> > >> > > * moveFailed = > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > C:/temp/failed/${file:onlyname}-${date:now:yyyyMMddHHmmssSSS}.${file:ext}* > > >> > >> > > * mydir = C:/temp* > > >> > >> > > * timestampedfile = > > >> > >> > > > > $\{file:onlyname\}-$\{date:now:yyyyMMddHHmmssSSS\}.$\{file:ext\}* > > >> > >> > > * service.pid = test* > > >> > >> > > * fromUri = > > >> > >> > > > > >> file:C:/temp?move=C:/temp/archive//-.&moveFailed=C:/temp/failed/-.* > > >> > >> > > * move = > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > C:/temp/archive/${date:now:yyyyMMdd}/${file:onlyname}-${date:now:yyyyMMddHHmmssSSS}.${file:ext}* > > >> > >> > > * felix.fileinstall.filename = > > >> > >> > > file:/C:/dev/karaf/connect/common/etc/test.cfg* > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > Thus, the variables "move" and "moveFailed" looks the way I > > want > > >> but > > >> > >> the > > >> > >> > > final variable "fromUri" is messed up because of an extra > > >> variable > > >> > >> > > substitution. > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > I haven't managed to come up with any number of backslashes > > that > > >> > will > > >> > >> > > produce the correct result for me. > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > The only workaround I have right now is to not use variables > at > > >> all. > > >> > >> It > > >> > >> > > does, however, make the configuration files extremely verbose > > and > > >> > it's > > >> > >> > easy > > >> > >> > > to introduce errors that way. > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > Presently, variable substitution is very unpredictable since > > it's > > >> > >> being > > >> > >> > > done in a recursive way. I would prefer doing it in an > > iterative > > >> > >> manner > > >> > >> > to > > >> > >> > > make it predictable. E g "${a}" should always evaluate to the > > >> same > > >> > >> value > > >> > >> > no > > >> > >> > > matter where in the configuration file it is referenced. > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > /Bengt > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > 2013/11/28 Bengt Rodehav <[email protected]> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > >> I've investigated this a bit more. There are actually two > > >> different > > >> > >> > >> problems: > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> a) The number of escape characters I need depends on from > > where > > >> I > > >> > >> > >> reference the variable. For every indirection I need to > double > > >> the > > >> > >> > number > > >> > >> > >> of backslashes. This also means that all uses of a variable > > >> > >> containing > > >> > >> > >> escape characters must be used from the same level of > > >> indirection. > > >> > A > > >> > >> bit > > >> > >> > >> complicated but it's due to the fact that all variables are > > >> > evaluated > > >> > >> > >> dynamically. This means that unescaping can occur several > > times. > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> b) FileInstall incorrectly thinks that a configuration > > property > > >> is > > >> > >> > >> changed and therefore overwrites the property with the > > evaluated > > >> > >> value. > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> I think I've found the reason (and possibly a solution) to > b). > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> In the ConfigInstaller.setConfig() method the properties are > > >> read > > >> > >> from a > > >> > >> > >> configuration file and propagated as a configuration. Here > is > > an > > >> > >> excerpt > > >> > >> > >> from that method: > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> * final Properties p = new Properties();* > > >> > >> > >> * in.mark(1);* > > >> > >> > >> * boolean isXml = in.read() == '<';* > > >> > >> > >> * in.reset();* > > >> > >> > >> * if (isXml) {* > > >> > >> > >> * p.loadFromXML(in);* > > >> > >> > >> * } else {* > > >> > >> > >> * p.load(in);* > > >> > >> > >> * }* > > >> > >> > >> * > InterpolationHelper.performSubstitution((Map) > > >> p, > > >> > >> > >> context);* > > >> > >> > >> * ht.putAll(p);* > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> Note that the file is read using Java's standard Properties > > >> class. > > >> > >> The > > >> > >> > >> unescaping is also done by that class. Then, at the end, the > > >> > variable > > >> > >> > >> substitution is done as a separate call. > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> Then look at the ConfigInstaller.configurationEvent() > method: > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> * if (configurationEvent.getType() == > > >> > >> > >> ConfigurationEvent.CM_UPDATED)* > > >> > >> > >> * {* > > >> > >> > >> * try* > > >> > >> > >> * {* > > >> > >> > >> * Configuration config = > > >> > >> > >> getConfigurationAdmin().getConfiguration(* > > >> > >> > >> * > > >> > >> > configurationEvent.getPid(),* > > >> > >> > >> * > > >> > >> > >> configurationEvent.getFactoryPid());* > > >> > >> > >> * Dictionary dict = config.getProperties();* > > >> > >> > >> * String fileName = (String) dict.get( > > >> > >> > >> DirectoryWatcher.FILENAME );* > > >> > >> > >> * File file = fileName != null ? > > >> > >> fromConfigKey(fileName) > > >> > >> > : > > >> > >> > >> null;* > > >> > >> > >> * if( file != null && file.isFile() ) {* > > >> > >> > >> * if( fileName.endsWith( ".cfg" ) )* > > >> > >> > >> * {* > > >> > >> > >> * > > >> > org.apache.felix.utils.properties.Properties > > >> > >> > >> props = new org.apache.felix.utils.properties.Properties( > > file, > > >> > >> context > > >> > >> > );* > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> Note that now the configuration file is read using > > >> > >> > >> org.apache.felix.utils.properties.Properties class. It turns > > out > > >> > that > > >> > >> > they > > >> > >> > >> don't produce identical results. I haven't investigated > > exactly > > >> how > > >> > >> they > > >> > >> > >> differ but they do. > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> A simple test: > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> 1. Create a configuration file with the following content: > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> a=$\\\\{var} > > >> > >> > >> ab=${a}b > > >> > >> > >> abc=${ab}c > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> 2. Add the following line at the end: > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> d=foo > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> 3. FileInstall will now incorrectly change the contents of > the > > >> > >> > >> configuration file to: > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> a=$\\\\{var} > > >> > >> > >> ab=${a}b > > >> > >> > >> abc = ${var}bc > > >> > >> > >> d=foo > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> Now if I change the ConfigInstaller.setConfig() method to > the > > >> > >> following: > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> *org.apache.felix.utils.properties.Properties p = new > > >> > >> > >> org.apache.felix.utils.properties.Properties( f, context );* > > >> > >> > >> *InterpolationHelper.performSubstitution((Map) p, context);* > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> Then FileInstall will not incorrectly change the contents of > > the > > >> > >> > >> configuration file. > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> I propose to do this change in order to solve problem b) > > above. > > >> I > > >> > >> > >> appreciate if you have any thoughts on this. > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> I realize that problem a) is trickier due to the dynamic > > nature > > >> of > > >> > >> > >> variable substitution. I haven't yet determined how I think > > the > > >> > >> escape > > >> > >> > >> characters should be handled but the current situation is > not > > >> > ideal. > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> /Bengt > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> 2013/11/28 Bengt Rodehav <[email protected]> > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >>> JIRA created: > > >> > >> > >>> > > >> > >> > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-4332 > > >> > >> > >>> > > >> > >> > >>> /Bengt > > >> > >> > >>> > > >> > >> > >>> > > >> > >> > >>> 2013/11/28 Bengt Rodehav <[email protected]> > > >> > >> > >>> > > >> > >> > >>>> I've come up with easily reproducable errors using Karaf > > >> 2.3.3: > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >> > >>>> - Install a fresh Karaf 2.3.3 > > >> > >> > >>>> - Add the following line to etc/custom.properties: > > >> > >> > >>>> felix.fileinstall.enableConfigSave = true > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >> > >>>> Create a file etc/test.cfg with the following contents: > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >> > >>>> a=$\\{var} > > >> > >> > >>>> ab=${a}b > > >> > >> > >>>> abc=${ab}c > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >> > >>>> I expect this to be evaluated to: > > >> > >> > >>>> a=$\{var} > > >> > >> > >>>> ab=$\{var}b > > >> > >> > >>>> abc=$\{var}bc > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >> > >>>> But if I execute the Karaf command: > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >> > >>>> config:list "(service.pid=test)" > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >> > >>>> I get: > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> > >> > >>>> Pid: test > > >> > >> > >>>> BundleLocation: null > > >> > >> > >>>> Properties: > > >> > >> > >>>> service.pid = test > > >> > >> > >>>> a = ${var} > > >> > >> > >>>> abc = bc > > >> > >> > >>>> felix.fileinstall.filename = > > >> > >> > >>>> file:/C:/dev/Karaf/apache-karaf-2.3.3/etc/test.cfg > > >> > >> > >>>> ab = b > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >> > >>>> My interpretation of this is that the variable "a" has > been > > >> > >> correctly > > >> > >> > >>>> evaluated. But, when evalutating the variable "ab" it > seems > > >> that > > >> > >> the > > >> > >> > >>>> variable "a" is evaluated again despite the fact that it > has > > >> > >> already > > >> > >> > been > > >> > >> > >>>> evaluated. FileInstall now looks for the value of a > variable > > >> > called > > >> > >> > "var" > > >> > >> > >>>> which evalutes to an empty string because there is no such > > >> > >> variable. > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >> > >>>> The variable "abc" consequently evaluates to "bc" since > the > > >> > >> variable > > >> > >> > >>>> "ab" has been evaluated to "b". > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >> > >>>> To make it even worse, now change the first row in > test.cfg > > >> to: > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >> > >>>> a=$\\\\{var} > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >> > >>>> We now get: > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> > >> > >>>> Pid: test > > >> > >> > >>>> BundleLocation: null > > >> > >> > >>>> Properties: > > >> > >> > >>>> service.pid = test > > >> > >> > >>>> a = $\{var} > > >> > >> > >>>> abc = ${var}bc > > >> > >> > >>>> felix.fileinstall.filename = > > >> > >> > >>>> file:/C:/dev/Karaf/apache-karaf-2.3.3/etc/test.cfg > > >> > >> > >>>> ab = ${var}b > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >> > >>>> Thus we get the same phenomenom. The variable "a" is > > evaluated > > >> > >> > >>>> differently if it is evaluated on its own or as part of > > >> another > > >> > >> > expression. > > >> > >> > >>>> But, due to having configured FileInstall to write back > > >> changes, > > >> > >> the > > >> > >> > >>>> contents of the test.cfg is now changed by FileInstall > > despite > > >> > the > > >> > >> > fact > > >> > >> > >>>> that the configuration has not changed at all. The > contents > > of > > >> > >> > test.cfg is > > >> > >> > >>>> now: > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >> > >>>> a=$\\\\{var} > > >> > >> > >>>> ab=${a}b > > >> > >> > >>>> abc = ${var}bc > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >> > >>>> The "abc" variable has been altered. FileInstall has > > >> incorrectly > > >> > >> > >>>> determined that its value has changed. > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >> > >>>> This is clearly a bug. I will create a JIRA. > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >> > >>>> /Bengt > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >> > >>>> 2013/11/26 Bengt Rodehav <[email protected]> > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >> > >>>>> I'm using Apache Karaf 2.3.3 which comes with FileInstall > > >> > 3.2.6. I > > >> > >> > >>>>> have set the felix.fileinstall.enableConfigSave property > to > > >> true > > >> > >> in > > >> > >> > order > > >> > >> > >>>>> to have FileInstall write back configuration changes to > the > > >> > file. > > >> > >> > Normally > > >> > >> > >>>>> all configuration changes are done by editing the > > >> configuration > > >> > >> file > > >> > >> > but > > >> > >> > >>>>> there is one property that I change programmatically > using > > >> > >> > ConfigAdmin (an > > >> > >> > >>>>> "enable" property to start/stop my service). I am > dependent > > >> on > > >> > >> that > > >> > >> > >>>>> property being persisted in the configuration file which > is > > >> why > > >> > I > > >> > >> > set the > > >> > >> > >>>>> enableConfigSave property to true. > > >> > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >> > >>>>> When configuring FileInstall to write back configuration > > >> changes > > >> > >> to > > >> > >> > >>>>> the configuration file, it is important that variables > are > > >> not > > >> > >> > substituted > > >> > >> > >>>>> for the evaluated value. This normally works since > > >> FileInstall > > >> > >> > evalutates > > >> > >> > >>>>> the property in the configuration file and compares it > with > > >> the > > >> > >> > >>>>> configuration admin's value. If they are the same, the > > value > > >> in > > >> > >> the > > >> > >> > >>>>> configuration file is kept unchanged. > > >> > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >> > >>>>> However, when using the escape character this is broken. > In > > >> my > > >> > >> case > > >> > >> > >>>>> I'm using Apache Camel underneath. When configuring > routes > > >> via > > >> > the > > >> > >> > config > > >> > >> > >>>>> admin, I sometimes need to set a value to > > >> > >> > >>>>> "${expression-to-be-evaluated-by-camel}". I therefore > > escape > > >> the > > >> > >> "{" > > >> > >> > and > > >> > >> > >>>>> "}" to stop FileInstall from trying to evaluate the > > >> expression. > > >> > >> Like > > >> > >> > this: > > >> > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >> > >>>>> $\\{expression-to-be-evaluated-by-camel\\} > > >> > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >> > >>>>> This also normally works but not when I have an > > indirection. > > >> E g > > >> > >> when > > >> > >> > >>>>> specifying the following: > > >> > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >> > >>>>> a=$\\{var} > > >> > >> > >>>>> ab=${a}b > > >> > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >> > >>>>> FileInstall will change the configuration file to: > > >> > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >> > >>>>> a=$\\{var} > > >> > >> > >>>>> ab = ${var}b > > >> > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >> > >>>>> Note that the variable "ab" has now been expanded and > > written > > >> > >> back to > > >> > >> > >>>>> the configuration file even if neither of the variables > "a" > > >> and > > >> > >> "ab" > > >> > >> > have > > >> > >> > >>>>> been changed. > > >> > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >> > >>>>> I think this is because FileInstall does the following: > > >> > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >> > >>>>> 1. Calculates the value of "a" to "$\{var} > > >> > >> > >>>>> 2. Calculates the value of "b" to "${var}b > > >> > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >> > >>>>> Note that every evaluation will perform "unescaping". > This > > >> means > > >> > >> that > > >> > >> > >>>>> an extra "unescaping" will be done for every indirection > > >> which > > >> > >> fools > > >> > >> > >>>>> FileInstall into thinking that the property has been > > changed. > > >> > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >> > >>>>> I'm not exactly sure how this should be fixed in > > FileInstall. > > >> > One > > >> > >> > idea > > >> > >> > >>>>> is to never "unescape" already evaluated variables. > > Actually > > >> I > > >> > >> think > > >> > >> > this > > >> > >> > >>>>> is probably what would fix this... > > >> > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >> > >>>>> Does anybody have any ideas about this? Should I create a > > >> JIRA? > > >> > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >> > >>>>> /Bengt > > >> > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >> > >>> > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> -- > > >> > >> ----------------------- > > >> > >> Guillaume Nodet > > >> > >> ------------------------ > > >> > >> Red Hat, Open Source Integration > > >> > >> > > >> > >> Email: [email protected] > > >> > >> Web: http://fusesource.com > > >> > >> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ > > >> > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
