Re: Changing JK_OPT_FWDURIDEFAULT to JK_OPT_FWDURICOMPATUNPARSED
On Tue, 2007-05-15 at 18:37 +0200, Rainer Jung wrote:
I didn't follow this, but the comment in the httpd 2.x module code says:
/*
* The 2.2 servlet spec errata says the uri from
* HttpServletRequest.getRequestURI() should remain encoded.
* [http://java.sun.com/products/servlet/errata_042700.html]
*
* We use JkOptions to determine which method to be used
*
* ap_escape_uri is the latest recommanded but require
* some java decoding (in TC 3.3 rc2)
*
* unparsed_uri is used for strict compliance with spec and
* old Tomcat (3.2.3 for example)
*
* uri is use for compatibilty with mod_rewrite with old Tomcats
*/
We do (pseudo code):
JK_OPT_FWDURICOMPATUNPARSED:
s-req_uri = r-unparsed_uri;
if (s-req_uri != NULL) {
char *query_str = strchr(s-req_uri, '?');
if (query_str != NULL) {
*query_str = 0;
}
}
JK_OPT_FWDURICOMPAT (the DEFAULT):
s-req_uri = r-uri;
JK_OPT_FWDURIESCAPED:
s-req_uri = ap_escape_uri(r-pool, r-uri);
break;
And finally our docs state:
The three following options +ForwardURIxxx are mutually exclusive. ...
By default, the option ForwardURICompat is turned on. You can turn this
off by switching on one of the other two.
JkOptions ForwardURICompat, you ask mod_jk to send the URI to Tomcat
normally, which is less spec compliant but mod_rewrite compatible, use
it for compatibility with Tomcat 3.2.x engines (on by default).
JkOptions ForwardURICompatUnparsed, the forwarded URI is unparsed, it's
spec compliant but broke mod_rewrite.
JkOptions ForwardURIEscaped, the forwarded URI is escaped and Tomcat
(since 3.3 rc2) will do the decoding part.
So what we do is what is documented. Breaking the default should have
serious reasons at least. For 1.3/3.0 we could consider changing more
easily of course.
Why do you think the default is bad?
Because it breaks the spec's and allows unexpected handling of url that
are encoded (for example: /context-A/%252E%252E/context-B that is send
to Tomcat as /context-A/%2E%2E/context-B and mapped by Tomcat
as /context-B).
Cheers
Jean-Frederic
Regards,
Rainer
Jean-Frederic wrote:
Hi,
I think that the default value of JK_OPT_FWDURIDEFAULT is bad and should
be JK_OPT_FWDURICOMPATUNPARSED.
Any comments?
Cheers
Jean-Frederic
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
svn commit: r538457 - /tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/apache-2.0/mod_jk.c
Author: hgomez
Date: Wed May 16 00:40:01 2007
New Revision: 538457
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=538457
Log:
On i5/OS, we still have the sent_bodyct cleared. Need further investigation by
Rochester Lab
Modified:
tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/apache-2.0/mod_jk.c
Modified: tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/apache-2.0/mod_jk.c
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/apache-2.0/mod_jk.c?view=diffrev=538457r1=538456r2=538457
==
--- tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/apache-2.0/mod_jk.c (original)
+++ tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/apache-2.0/mod_jk.c Wed May 16 00:40:01
2007
@@ -314,11 +314,6 @@
}
}
- /* under i5/OS this flag is not set correctly */
-#ifdef AS400
-r-sent_bodyct = 1;
-#endif
-
/* this NOP function was removed in apache 2.0 alpha14 */
/* ap_send_http_header(r); */
p-response_started = JK_TRUE;
@@ -2230,7 +2225,14 @@
if (rc 0) {
/* If tomcat returned no body and the status is not OK,
let apache handle the error code */
+
+/* [EMAIL PROTECTED] : under i5/OS sent_bodyct is not set correctly */
+/* check for header_only to see if there was a body */
+#ifdef AS400
+ if (r-header_only r-status =
HTTP_BAD_REQUEST) {
+#else
if (!r-sent_bodyct r-status = HTTP_BAD_REQUEST) {
+#endif
jk_log(xconf-log, JK_LOG_INFO, No body with status=%d
for worker=%s,
r-status, worker_name);
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
svn commit: r538459 - /tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/apache-2.0/mod_jk.c
Author: hgomez
Date: Wed May 16 00:45:56 2007
New Revision: 538459
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=538459
Log:
We should take a closer look to this, not only in i5/OS case
Modified:
tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/apache-2.0/mod_jk.c
Modified: tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/apache-2.0/mod_jk.c
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/apache-2.0/mod_jk.c?view=diffrev=538459r1=538458r2=538459
==
--- tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/apache-2.0/mod_jk.c (original)
+++ tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/apache-2.0/mod_jk.c Wed May 16 00:45:56
2007
@@ -2226,13 +2226,9 @@
/* If tomcat returned no body and the status is not OK,
let apache handle the error code */
-/* [EMAIL PROTECTED] : under i5/OS sent_bodyct is not set correctly */
+/* [EMAIL PROTECTED] : under i5/OS sent_bodyct is not set correctly */
/* check for header_only to see if there was a body */
-#ifdef AS400
- if (r-header_only r-status =
HTTP_BAD_REQUEST) {
-#else
if (!r-sent_bodyct r-status = HTTP_BAD_REQUEST) {
-#endif
jk_log(xconf-log, JK_LOG_INFO, No body with status=%d
for worker=%s,
r-status, worker_name);
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
svn commit: r538461 - /tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/apache-2.0/mod_jk.c
Author: hgomez Date: Wed May 16 00:52:32 2007 New Revision: 538461 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=538461 Log: Restore the i5/OS hack Modified: tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/apache-2.0/mod_jk.c Modified: tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/apache-2.0/mod_jk.c URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/apache-2.0/mod_jk.c?view=diffrev=538461r1=538460r2=538461 == --- tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/apache-2.0/mod_jk.c (original) +++ tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/apache-2.0/mod_jk.c Wed May 16 00:52:32 2007 @@ -318,6 +318,12 @@ /* ap_send_http_header(r); */ p-response_started = JK_TRUE; + /* [EMAIL PROTECTED]: under i5/OS this flag is not set correctly */ + /* We should check with Rochester Labs what could be the problem */ +#ifdef AS400 +r-sent_bodyct = 1; +#endif + return JK_TRUE; } - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More on i5/OS and some modifications needed
2007/4/24, Henri Gomez [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 2007/4/24, Rainer Jung [EMAIL PROTECTED]: The flag is about the response body. We send the response back via a webserver specific method. It's ws_write() ind mod_jk.c. ws_write() calls e.g. ap_rwrite() which should in my opinion set sent_bodyct. I'm careful about that, because I don't fully understand the filter architecture involved. But ws_write() also contains iSeries specific code. Maybe some of those methods fail. You can log p-r-sent_bodyct inside ws_write and also add some debug log to find out, if it stopps prematurely. Especially ap_change_response_body_xlate() does not seem to be part of standard apache code. No idea, if that has an interaction bug with filters. No more, we're is AS400_UTF8 mode so the ws_write in i5/OS and Linux is the same... Did you heard about problem with sent_bodyct problem on others platform ? BTW, what about the BZ 41563 (http://marc.info/?l=tomcat-devm=117089564901077w=2) and proposed patch ? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 42433] New: - configuration of bugzilla with tomcat
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=42433. 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=42433 Summary: configuration of bugzilla with tomcat Product: Tomcat 5 Version: 5.5.8 Platform: Other OS/Version: Windows XP Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P1 Component: Servlet JSP API AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] how to configure tomcat with bugzilla. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 42419] - Options for changing jsessionid cookie name
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=42419. 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=42419 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] URL||http://localhost:/Agasth ||a11/ Keywords||XSLTBug OS/Version|All |Windows XP -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40056] - added httpHeader after invoking chain.doFilter(..) gets lost by chunked transfer
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=40056. 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=40056 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|tomcat- |[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-16 03:01 --- Created an attachment (id=20204) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20204action=view) about my product -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 42434] New: - JSP wraps RuntimeException in ServletException
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=42434. 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=42434 Summary: JSP wraps RuntimeException in ServletException Product: Tomcat 5 Version: 5.5.15 Platform: PC OS/Version: Windows XP Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Jasper AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] When a RuntimeException is thrown in a JSP, it becomes wrapped (by the code generated by Jasper) in a ServletException. This prevents e.g. a Filter from catching the RuntimeException and handling it, since it is wrapped in a ServletException (which might have to be caught and handled differently). This behaviour differs from an ordinary servlet, which passes a RuntimeException upwards, as expected. It is hard to see the reason why a JSP should behave differerent from any other kind of servlet in this respect. -- 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]
Re: Changing JK_OPT_FWDURIDEFAULT to JK_OPT_FWDURICOMPATUNPARSED
Why do you think the default is bad? Because it breaks the spec's and allows unexpected handling of url that are encoded (for example: /context-A/%252E%252E/context-B that is send to Tomcat as /context-A/%2E%2E/context-B and mapped by Tomcat as /context-B). So what how do you suggest to handle a change. - Being secure by default, i.e. really changing the default in 1.2 and putting a big note about it in the docs, the news page and maybe the download README or/and - Staying compatible in 1.2, changing in 1.3 but putting a big note in the docs page about the options concerning the security relevance of the options. Regards, Rainer - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More on i5/OS and some modifications needed
On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 10:17 +0200, Henri Gomez wrote: 2007/4/24, Henri Gomez [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 2007/4/24, Rainer Jung [EMAIL PROTECTED]: The flag is about the response body. We send the response back via a webserver specific method. It's ws_write() ind mod_jk.c. ws_write() calls e.g. ap_rwrite() which should in my opinion set sent_bodyct. I'm careful about that, because I don't fully understand the filter architecture involved. The ap_http_header_filter sets the sent_bodyct. If I get it right ap_http_header_filter is called by ap_pass_brigade that is called by ap_rwrite in ws_write() In 1.3 it is set in ap_send_http_header() that we call in mod_jk.c (ws_start_response). But ws_write() also contains iSeries specific code. Maybe some of those methods fail. You can log p-r-sent_bodyct inside ws_write and also add some debug log to find out, if it stopps prematurely. Especially ap_change_response_body_xlate() does not seem to be part of standard apache code. No idea, if that has an interaction bug with filters. No more, we're is AS400_UTF8 mode so the ws_write in i5/OS and Linux is the same... Did you heard about problem with sent_bodyct problem on others platform ? BTW, what about the BZ 41563 (http://marc.info/?l=tomcat-devm=117089564901077w=2) and proposed patch ? +1 to apply it. Cheers Jean-Frederic - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Changing JK_OPT_FWDURIDEFAULT to JK_OPT_FWDURICOMPATUNPARSED
On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 13:17 +0200, Rainer Jung wrote: Why do you think the default is bad? Because it breaks the spec's and allows unexpected handling of url that are encoded (for example: /context-A/%252E%252E/context-B that is send to Tomcat as /context-A/%2E%2E/context-B and mapped by Tomcat as /context-B). So what how do you suggest to handle a change. - Being secure by default, i.e. really changing the default in 1.2 and putting a big note about it in the docs, the news page and maybe the download README Yes I think that the correct option. Default values should always follow the spec's and be as secure as possible. Cheers Jean-Frederic or/and - Staying compatible in 1.2, changing in 1.3 but putting a big note in the docs page about the options concerning the security relevance of the options. Regards, Rainer - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 42433] - configuration of bugzilla with tomcat
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=42433. 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=42433 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-16 06:21 --- bugzilla is not a support forum please use the tomcat user list for support. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 42435] New: - Insufficient error report from Jasper
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=42435.
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=42435
Summary: Insufficient error report from Jasper
Product: Tomcat 5
Version: 5.0.23
Platform: Other
OS/Version: other
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: Jasper
AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The method DefaultErrorHandler.javacError(JavacErrorDetail[]) contains the
following code:
for (int i=0; i details.length; i++) {
if (details[i].getJspBeginLineNumber() = 0) {
...
}
}
Basically, this means, that error details are skipped, if the line number is -1.
Unfortunately, there are cases, when the compiler reports events with -1.
I propose, to change this code to look like in jasper 6:
for (int i=0; i details.length; i++) {
if (details[i].getJspBeginLineNumber() = 0) {
args = new Object[] {
new Integer(details[i].getJspBeginLineNumber()),
details[i].getJspFileName() };
buf.append(Localizer.getMessage(jsp.error.single.line.number,
args));
buf.append(\n);
}
buf.append(
Localizer.getMessage(jsp.error.corresponding.servlet));
buf.append(details[i].getErrorMessage());
buf.append(\n\n);
}
--
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]
svn commit: r538609 - /tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/jkstatus/example/show.txt
Author: jfclere Date: Wed May 16 07:18:14 2007 New Revision: 538609 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=538609 Log: Just some instructions how to use it. Added: tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/jkstatus/example/show.txt Added: tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/jkstatus/example/show.txt URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/jkstatus/example/show.txt?view=autorev=538609 == --- tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/jkstatus/example/show.txt (added) +++ tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/jkstatus/example/show.txt Wed May 16 07:18:14 2007 @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ +How to use the show example: +ant -f show.xml +Configure mod_jk (httpd.conf and workers.properties): +JkMount /jkstatus jkstatus + +worker.list=jkstatus +worker.jkstatus.type=status + +Adjust jkstatus.properties.default: +jkstatus.port (for example). - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 42436] New: - service-qname and soap-header not parsed correctly
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=42436. 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=42436 Summary: service-qname and soap-header not parsed correctly Product: Tomcat 6 Version: 6.0.11 Platform: All OS/Version: Mac OS X 10.4 Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: P2 Component: Catalina AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The service-qname and soap-header elements are type j2ee:xsdQNameType according to the schema at: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk/java/javax/servlet/resources/j2ee_web_services_client_1_1.xsd Using this schema, an example soap-header element might look like: soap-header xmlns:myns=http://myns.org;myns:extra-header/soap-header However Tomcat's digester expects a soap-header element to look like: soap-header namespaceURIhttp://myns.org/namespaceURI localpartextra-header/localpart /soap-header which is from a previous webservice DTD, I think. When the digester processes a web.xml that uses the correct form of soap-header it produces this stack trace: May 16, 2007 10:18:08 AM org.apache.tomcat.util.digester.Digester endElement SEVERE: End event threw exception java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Can't convert argument: null at org.apache.tomcat.util.IntrospectionUtils.convert(IntrospectionUtils.java:976) at org.apache.tomcat.util.digester.CallMethodRule.end(CallMethodRule.java:523) at org.apache.tomcat.util.digester.Rule.end(Rule.java:229) at org.apache.tomcat.util.digester.Digester.endElement(Digester.java:1058) at com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.parsers.AbstractSAXParser.endElement(AbstractSAXParser.java:633) service-qname elements that use the correct form do not produce a stacktrace but they are not processed correctly. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 42436] - service-qname and soap-header not parsed correctly
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=42436. 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=42436 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-16 09:21 --- Created an attachment (id=20207) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20207action=view) sample web.xml that demonstrates the problem -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 42436] - service-qname and soap-header not parsed correctly
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=42436. 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=42436 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-16 09:23 --- Created an attachment (id=20208) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20208action=view) patch that updates WebRuleSet to parse soap-header and service-qname correctly -- 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]
Re: Annotation processing - Geronimo injection
On Apr 12, 2007, at 12:15 PM, Remy Maucherat wrote: David Jencks wrote: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12355273/ GERONIMO-3010-4.patch In addition, this one combines the InstanceManager interfaces. I think this is a bad idea because it forces jasper to use an interface shared with catalina, which the previous patch does not. This makes catalina marginally more complicated when used as a standalone container for jasper but makes it possible to use jasper outside catalina without any catalina classes. Note also that the previous (3c) patch allows use of tomcat embedded in a container that supplies its own InstanceManager implementation without pulling in any jasper classes at runtime. This has 1 interface, 1 implementation. Thanks for the patch revisions. I will look into adding these features after the next stable release. Rémy Now that 6.0.13 has been released is it a good time to resume this discussion about annotation processing? I have been using David's patch in geronimo's Tomcat assembly for the last several weeks and it has proven to be quite stable. David, do you consider the latest patch to be feature complete as far as where the discussion left off? Have the issues that were raised in this discussion been addressed? Best wishes, Paul - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Annotation processing - Geronimo injection
On May 16, 2007, at 1:10 PM, Paul McMahan wrote: On Apr 12, 2007, at 12:15 PM, Remy Maucherat wrote: David Jencks wrote: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12355273/ GERONIMO-3010-4.patch In addition, this one combines the InstanceManager interfaces. I think this is a bad idea because it forces jasper to use an interface shared with catalina, which the previous patch does not. This makes catalina marginally more complicated when used as a standalone container for jasper but makes it possible to use jasper outside catalina without any catalina classes. Note also that the previous (3c) patch allows use of tomcat embedded in a container that supplies its own InstanceManager implementation without pulling in any jasper classes at runtime. This has 1 interface, 1 implementation. Thanks for the patch revisions. I will look into adding these features after the next stable release. Rémy Now that 6.0.13 has been released is it a good time to resume this discussion about annotation processing? I have been using David's patch in geronimo's Tomcat assembly for the last several weeks and it has proven to be quite stable. David, do you consider the latest patch to be feature complete as far as where the discussion left off? Have the issues that were raised in this discussion been addressed? As far as I know I've addressed all the issues that were raised, but that might have a tenuous relationship to whether I actually did :-). I'd certainly appreciate review by tomcat committers before I completely forget how my patch works :-) thanks david jencks Best wishes, Paul - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 42314] - Jasper output no details with compilation error in specific case.
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=42314. 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=42314 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-16 15:38 --- *** Bug 42435 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 42438] New: - Duplicate JSP temp variable declaration when jsp:attribute used in conjunction with custom tags
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=42438.
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=42438
Summary: Duplicate JSP temp variable declaration when
jsp:attribute used in conjunction with custom tags
Product: Tomcat 5
Version: 5.0.20
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: major
Priority: P2
Component: Jasper
AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Here is an example of the bug in its most primitive form:
WEB-INF/jsp/test.jsp:
===
%@ page contentType=text/html;charset=UTF-8 language=java %
%@ taglib prefix=c uri=http://java.sun.com/jsp/jstl/core%
%@ taglib prefix=t tagdir=/WEB-INF/tags %
jsp:element name=a
jsp:attribute name=hrefhttp://www.apache.org/jsp:attribute
/jsp:element
t:test /
c:if test=${true}it's true!/c:if
===
WEB-INF/tags/test.tag:
===
%@ tag pageEncoding=UTF-8 body-content=scriptless %
do nothing
===
WEB-INF/tagPlugins.xml:
===
tag-plugins
tag-plugin
tag-classorg.apache.taglibs.standard.tag.rt.core.IfTag/tag-class
plugin-classorg.apache.jasper.tagplugins.jstl.core.If/plugin-class
/tag-plugin
/tag-plugins
===
Once you run this through Jasper, you will get the following java code:
===
package org.apache.jsp.WEB_002dINF.jsp;
import javax.servlet.*;
import javax.servlet.http.*;
import javax.servlet.jsp.*;
public final class test_jsp extends org.apache.jasper.runtime.HttpJspBase
implements org.apache.jasper.runtime.JspSourceDependent {
private static java.util.List _jspx_dependants;
static {
_jspx_dependants = new java.util.ArrayList(1);
_jspx_dependants.add(/WEB-INF/tags/test.tag);
}
private org.apache.jasper.runtime.TagHandlerPool _jspx_tagPool_c_if_test;
public Object getDependants() {
return _jspx_dependants;
}
public void _jspInit() {
_jspx_tagPool_c_if_test =
org.apache.jasper.runtime.TagHandlerPool.getTagHandlerPool(getServletConfig());
}
public void _jspDestroy() {
_jspx_tagPool_c_if_test.release();
}
public void _jspService(HttpServletRequest request, HttpServletResponse
response)
throws java.io.IOException, ServletException {
JspFactory _jspxFactory = null;
PageContext pageContext = null;
HttpSession session = null;
ServletContext application = null;
ServletConfig config = null;
JspWriter out = null;
Object page = this;
JspWriter _jspx_out = null;
PageContext _jspx_page_context = null;
try {
_jspxFactory = JspFactory.getDefaultFactory();
response.setContentType(text/html;charset=UTF-8);
pageContext = _jspxFactory.getPageContext(this, request, response,
null, true, 8192, true);
_jspx_page_context = pageContext;
application = pageContext.getServletContext();
config = pageContext.getServletConfig();
session = pageContext.getSession();
out = pageContext.getOut();
_jspx_out = out;
String _jspx_temp0 = http://www.apache.org;;
out.write( + a + href=\ + _jspx_temp0 + \ + /);
if (_jspx_meth_t_test_0(_jspx_page_context))
return;
boolean _jspx_temp0=
((java.lang.Boolean)
org.apache.jasper.runtime.PageContextImpl.proprietaryEvaluate(${true},
java.lang.Boolean.class, (PageContext)_jspx_page_context, null,
false)).booleanValue();
if (_jspx_temp0){
out.write(it's true!);
}
} catch (Throwable t) {
if (!(t instanceof SkipPageException)){
out = _jspx_out;
if (out != null out.getBufferSize() != 0)
out.clearBuffer();
if (_jspx_page_context != null)
_jspx_page_context.handlePageException(t);
}
} finally {
if (_jspxFactory != null)
_jspxFactory.releasePageContext(_jspx_page_context);
}
}
private boolean _jspx_meth_t_test_0(PageContext _jspx_page_context)
throws Throwable {
PageContext pageContext = _jspx_page_context;
JspWriter out = _jspx_page_context.getOut();
// t:test
org.apache.jsp.tag.web.test_tag _jspx_th_t_test_0 = new
org.apache.jsp.tag.web.test_tag();
_jspx_th_t_test_0.setJspContext(_jspx_page_context);
_jspx_th_t_test_0.doTag();
return false;
}
}
===
Scan that code for the temp variable named _jspx_temp0. Notice that there is
one String with that name and one boolean with that name. Thus, this results in
a java compilation error once you ultimately try to compile the page:
===
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 42438] - Duplicate JSP temp variable declaration when jsp:attribute used in conjunction with custom tags
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=42438. 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=42438 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-16 18:14 --- FWIW, I have built my own custom jasper-compiler.jar with the two patches I mentioned, and it definitively solved my use case. -- 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]
