On Aug 10, 2005, at 2:44 PM, toby cabot wrote:
Hi Folks,
I'm working on getting web authentication to work, and it's mostly
there thanks to whoever wrote the "demo" application. Thanks for
that, I learned a lot from looking at it.
Now I'd like to start the various gbeans in geronimo-application.xml
instead of relying on the ones in the org/apache/geronimo/Secure plan.
It mostly works, but the problem is getting a reference to ServerInfo.
If I crib from the demo app, like so:
<gbean name="hello-realm"
class="org.apache.geronimo.security.realm.GenericSecurityRealm">
<attribute name="realmName">hello-realm</attribute>
<reference name="LoginModuleConfiguration">
<name>hello-login-chain</name>
</reference>
<reference name="ServerInfo">
<module>org/apache/geronimo/System</module>
<name>ServerInfo</name>
</reference>
</gbean>
I get this in the log:
17:03:49,034 DEBUG main
[org.apache.geronimo.gbean.runtime.GBeanSingleReference] Waiting to
start
geronimo.server:
J2EEApplication=hello,J2EEModule=null,J2EEServer=geronimo,j2eeType=Secu
rityRealm,name=hello-realm because no targets are running for
reference ServerInfo matching the patternspatterns
geronimo.server:J2EEApplication=hello,J2EEModule=org/apache/geronimo/
System,J2EEServer=geronimo,j2eeType=GBean,name=ServerInfo
... and the hello-realm gbean is stuck in the starting state. Note
that it's looking for ServerInfo with "J2EEApplication=hello" (which
is the name of my application) whereas the real ServerInfo has
"J2EEApplication=null". I also tried swapping the module and name
elements with:
<gbean-name>geronimo.server:J2EEApplication=null,J2EEModule=org/
apache/geronimo/
System,J2EEServer=geronimo,j2eeType=GBean,name=ServerInfo</gbean-name>
... then it works, but this seems much more brittle to me than using
the module and the name. It works in the module/name case if I deploy
the gbean descriptors in a standalone descriptor file rather than in
the ear.
I'm wondering if in the module/name case Geronimo should try the
current application first, and if that fails try J2EEApplication=null.
If that sounds like a good idea I'd be willing to take a stab at it if
someone could point me to roughly the code that's doing the
translation from module/name to gbean name.
I'd like to think a bit more about whether this is appropriate before I
agree. You can include an <application>null</application> element to
specify the app. One reason I hesitate to say "great idea" is that
currently we are explicitly constructing a gbean name from what you
supply + the context of the configuration (which is where the
application name you see comes from). Your suggestion would require
querying the deployment context and kernel for an existing gbean of
that name. This would mean you'd have to install gbeandatas for every
gbean in a configuration during the install phase rather than the
addGBeans phase and it would impede constructing references between
modules when one module is not deployed yet.
I guess we could query in the current configuration/DeploymentContext
and then construct a gbean with application name "null" This would
require only rewriting all the deployers to register gbeandatas during
the install phase and changing the service builder to do queries on the
current deployment context. I'm still not sure this is a good idea.
BTW, the "secure" configuration should really be part of the demo app,
in its plan :-) Would you be interested in patching up moving it
there?
thanks
david jencks
Thanks,
Toby
