Cool, happy it works.

And +1 for documentation update.

Regards
JB

> Le 29 oct. 2020 à 11:52, Robert Varga <n...@hq.sk> a écrit :
> 
> On 29/10/2020 06:57, Jean-Baptiste Onofre wrote:
>> Hi Robert,
> 
> Hey JB,
> 
>> Do you have <javase/> define in your pom ?
> 
> You are spot on.  No, I did not, now I have and it works just fine.
> 
> I will push a patch to documentation to mention it in
> https://karaf.apache.org/manual/latest/#_instances_and_distributions_goals
> :)
> 
> Thanks,
> Robert
> 
>> 
>> Regards
>> JB
>> 
>>> Le 28 oct. 2020 à 13:35, Robert Varga <n...@hq.sk> a écrit :
>>> 
>>> Hello,
>>> 
>>> I am giving the static distro a try and it works quite well, except one
>>> problem.
>>> 
>>> Running karaf-4.3.0 RC with Java 11, attempting to include
>>> jakarta.activation-api/1.2.2 fails with:
>>> 
>>>> [ERROR] Failed to execute goal 
>>>> org.apache.karaf.tooling:karaf-maven-plugin:4.3.0:assembly 
>>>> (process-resources) on project test-static: Unable to build assembly:
>>>> Unable to resolve root: missing requirement [root] osgi.identity; 
>>>> osgi.identity=odl-jackson-2.11; type=karaf.feature; 
>>>> version=8.0.1.SNAPSHOT; 
>>>> filter:="(&(osgi.identity=odl-jackson-2.11)(type=karaf.feature)(version>=8.0.1.SNAPSHOT))"
>>>>  [caused by:
>>>> Unable to resolve odl-jackson-2.11/8.0.1.SNAPSHOT: missing requirement 
>>>> [odl-jackson-2.11/8.0.1.SNAPSHOT] osgi.identity; 
>>>> osgi.identity=odl-jakarta-activation-api; type=karaf.feature; 
>>>> version="[8.0.1.SNAPSHOT,8.0.1.SNAPSHOT]" [caused by:
>>>> Unable to resolve odl-jakarta-activation-api/8.0.1.SNAPSHOT: missing 
>>>> requirement [odl-jakarta-activation-api/8.0.1.SNAPSHOT] osgi.identity; 
>>>> osgi.identity=jakarta.activation-api; type=osgi.bundle; 
>>>> version="[1.2.2,1.2.2]"; resolution:=mandatory [
>>>> caused by: Unable to resolve jakarta.activation-api/1.2.2: missing 
>>>> requirement [jakarta.activation-api/1.2.2] osgi.ee; 
>>>> filter:="(&(osgi.ee=JavaSE)(version=9.0))"]]] -> [Help 1]
>>> 
>>> i.e. static resolver seems to not consider JavaSE=9.0 to be available,
>>> whereas the dynamic resolver works just fine.
>>> 
>>> Any ideas where to fix or suppress this?
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Robert
>> 

Reply via email to