Hi Ray We are using
org.osgi.framework.bundle.parent=framework If this is what you were referring to. Regards Felix Am 06.08.2014 um 08:51 schrieb Raymond Auge <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>: Thank you Felix. Do you know which mode of the framework classloader is required for bootdelegation to work when embedded? I tried the bootdelegation earlier, but I didn't not succeed. However, I am running embedded so that may play into my issue. Sincerely, - Ray On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 11:42 PM, Felix Meschberger <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi I think this bundle is just wrong: It is declared to not depend on com.sun classes and the com.sun.org.apache classes are repackagings to not collide with the official (and potentially newer versions) of these classes. And yes, we also generally do a boot delegation to com.sun.* and sun.* for the sake of supporting the javax.xml factories to be able to get to the implementation details. Regards Felix Am 06.08.2014 um 02:24 schrieb Raymond Auge <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>: An example of a osgi bundle which requires such packages is: javax.servlet.jsp.jstl [1] While I can certainly export all these packages from the system bundle by hand, I'm wondering there's any mechanism which might simplify the task, and the maintenance of such over time. [1] http://search.maven.org/#browse%7C-1002239558 On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Raymond Auge <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Is it wrong to use org.osgi.framework.bootdelegation=com.sun.org.apache.* - Ray On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Raymond Auge <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Specifically, I'm talking about com.sun.org.apache.* On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Raymond Auge <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: What's the best approach to allowing use of the com.sun.* xml packages provided by Java SE? There's a huge number of packages there and listing them out is tedious! Note that the problem is not direct use of container classes, but because the way the XML factories/providers handle creating impls. Someone must have tackled this before. Thoughts? -- Raymond Augé<http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile> (@rotty3000) Senior Software Architect Liferay, Inc.<http://www.liferay.com/> (@Liferay) -- Raymond Augé<http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile> (@rotty3000) Senior Software Architect Liferay, Inc.<http://www.liferay.com/> (@Liferay) -- Raymond Augé<http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile> (@rotty3000) Senior Software Architect Liferay, Inc.<http://www.liferay.com/> (@Liferay) -- Raymond Augé<http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile> (@rotty3000) Senior Software Architect Liferay, Inc.<http://www.liferay.com/> (@Liferay) _______________________________________________ OSGi Developer Mail List [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev _______________________________________________ OSGi Developer Mail List [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev -- Raymond Augé<http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile> (@rotty3000) Senior Software Architect Liferay, Inc.<http://www.liferay.com/> (@Liferay) _______________________________________________ OSGi Developer Mail List [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
_______________________________________________ OSGi Developer Mail List [email protected] https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
