Great. I've just committed a fix for FELIX-4339
2013/12/5 Bengt Rodehav <[email protected]> > Yes Guillaume - I agree with the behaviour in your test. All the properties > should have the same number of backslashes. > > /Bengt > > > 2013/12/5 Guillaume Nodet <[email protected]> > > > Yeah, that's clearly FELIX-4339. > > I have a fix which makes the following test to succeed: > > > > public void testMultipleEscapes() > > { > > LinkedHashMap<String, String> map1 = new LinkedHashMap<String, > > String>(); > > map1.put("a", "$\\\\{var}"); > > map1.put("abc", "${ab}c"); > > map1.put("ab", "${a}b"); > > InterpolationHelper.performSubstitution(map1); > > > > assertEquals("$\\{var}", map1.get("a")); > > assertEquals("$\\{var}b", map1.get("ab")); > > assertEquals("$\\{var}bc", map1.get("abc")); > > } > > > > Do we agree that's the behavior we should look for ? > > > > > > > > 2013/12/5 Bengt Rodehav <[email protected]> > > > > > I've now tested FileInstall (and Utils) from trunk. Most things seem to > > > have been fixed now. In particular: > > > > > > - I haven't seen any "false" write back of configuration changes. > > > - The variables are not evaluated more than once which makes things > much > > > more deterministic > > > > > > I've found one remaining issue though. The unescaping is still not > > > deterministic. Every time the value of a variable is needed, it is > > > unescaped. I've tested this in Karaf 2.3.3 by putting a file called > > > test.cfg in the etc directory. I then issue the following command from > > the > > > Karaf console to see how my configuration is evaluated: > > > > > > config:list "(service.pid=test)" > > > > > > What I have found is that the following contents of test.cfg: > > > > > > a = $\\{var} > > > ab = ${a}b > > > abc = ${ab}c > > > > > > evaluates to: > > > > > > a = ${var} > > > ab = ${var}b > > > abc = ${var}bc > > > > > > This is correct (according to me). Note that testing it this way I need > > two > > > backslash characters instead of one as you used Guillaume. > > > > > > But, assume that I actually want my configuration to include a > backslash, > > > like this: > > > > > > a = $\\\\{var} > > > ab = ${a}b > > > abc = ${ab}c > > > > > > This evaluates to: > > > > > > a = $\{var} > > > ab = ${var}b > > > abc = ${var}bc > > > > > > Here the variable "a" is OK. But when ${a} is used in the other > > variables, > > > the backslash is unescaped and lost. This can be seen even more clearly > > if > > > you add two more backslashes. Like this: > > > > > > a = $\\\\\\\\{var} > > > ab = ${a}b > > > abc = ${ab}c > > > > > > We then get: > > > > > > a = $\\{var} > > > ab = $\{var}b > > > abc = ${var}bc > > > > > > Thus, every time the variable "a" is evaluated, a backslash is removed. > > > > > > It would be good if this could be fixed as well so that backslashes > could > > > be part of the configuration in a deterministic way. > > > > > > Note that the problematic configuration that I had no workaround for > now > > > works fine. If I put this in the configuration file: > > > > > > mydir=C:/temp > > > > > > > > > timestampedfile=$\\{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} > > > > > > It is evaluated to: > > > > > > mydir = C:/temp > > > timestampedfile = > > > ${file:onlyname}-${date:now:yyyyMMddHHmmssSSS}.${file:ext} > > > move = > > > > > > > > > C:/temp/archive/${date:now:yyyyMMdd}/${file:onlyname}-${date:now:yyyyMMddHHmmssSSS}.${file:ext} > > > moveFailed = > > > > C:/temp/failed/${file:onlyname}-${date:now:yyyyMMddHHmmssSSS}.${file:ext} > > > fromUri = > > > > > > > > > file:C:/temp?move=C:/temp/archive/${date:now:yyyyMMdd}/${file:onlyname}-${date:now:yyyyMMddHHmmssSSS}.${file:ext}&moveFailed=C:/temp/failed/${file:onlyname}-${date:now:yyyyMMddHHmmssSSS}.${file:ext} > > > > > > which is what I want. Note that I now only need two backslashes to make > > > this work. > > > > > > But, if I wanted some part of my configuration to actually contain a > > > backslash then I would run into trouble. > > > > > > /Bengt > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2013/12/4 Bengt Rodehav <[email protected]> > > > > > > > I'll give it a shot. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > /Bengt > > > > > > > > > > > > 2013/12/4 Guillaume Nodet <[email protected]> > > > > > > > >> Not on the karaf side, but if you build felix utils, file install, > and > > > >> change the karaf version to refer to those new ones and rebuild, it > > > should > > > >> be ok. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> 2013/12/4 Bengt Rodehav <[email protected]> > > > >> > > > >> > 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/ > > > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
