DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37854>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37854 Summary: Too strict Extension-List analysis Product: Tomcat 4 Version: 4.1.31 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Unknown AssignedTo: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Using Extension-List in MANIFEST.MF jar files allows to specify dependencies between libraries or webapps. When a jar depends on an Extension without specifying an Implementation-Vendor-Id AND the corresponding extension does not specify an Implementation-Vendor-Id, tomcat fails loading the corresponding context claiming for a missing dependency. I thing that in this case (no Implementation-Vendor-Id in either files) the Implementation-Vendor-Id's must be considered OK and that it must not be enought to consider the dependency broken. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
