DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33453] Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33453 Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #69 from Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org 2011-06-20 18:03:09 UTC --- This has been fixed in 7.0.x and will be included in 7.0.17 onwards. The fix was fairly invasive so it will not be back-ported to 6.0.x or 5.5.x. -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33453] Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33453 --- Comment #68 from Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org 2011-05-28 18:55:51 UTC --- Feedback on proposed TC7 patch: http://tomcat.markmail.org/thread/mbjdpr4bvw6gzx62 -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33453] Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33453 --- Comment #67 from Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org 2011-05-20 16:26:13 UTC --- Created attachment 27040 -- https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27040 Proposed patch for Tomcat 7 Having spent a little time on this, I am attaching a proposed patch for Tomcat 7. The patch breaks binary compatibility for compiled JSPs which I am not at all comfortable about. I have some ideas for a solution to that which I will be discussing on the dev list. If this issue is addressed in Tomcat 7, I don't see the fix being back-ported to earlier versions. -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33453] Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33453 Antoine Prevosto antoine.prevo...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||antoine.prevo...@gmail.com -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33453] Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33453 Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gus.h...@olin.edu --- Comment #66 from Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org 2010-12-17 09:14:37 EST --- *** Bug 15417 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33453] Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33453 Roberto [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Version|5.5.9 |5.5.15 -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-28 06:42 --- I haven't had to make any additional changes to the code in the patch. I have only used the patch in conjunction with JBoss 4.0.2. I have been using the code in development and production since I posted it. (In reply to comment #63) (In reply to comment #62) Darryl's last comments aside on changing the management of the entire work tree, I want to ask Jonathan and anyone who's used his patches: have they been stable and OK? Have there been any modifications needed to them? If not, i.e. if they've been stable, I'm tempted to add them to the 5.5 tree. -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 17:13 --- (In reply to comment #62) Darryl's last comments aside on changing the management of the entire work tree, I want to ask Jonathan and anyone who's used his patches: have they been stable and OK? Have there been any modifications needed to them? If not, i.e. if they've been stable, I'm tempted to add them to the 5.5 tree. -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P1 |P3 Version|Nightly Build |5.5.9 -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-08 15:43 --- My patch doesn't change the overall strategy for invoking the isOutDated() check, as you are suggesting. The isOutDated() check does load the class, as it did prior to my patch. Revalidating the entire tree would cause all the class files to be loaded, which would be bad. However, with the isOutDated() method fixed, I see no reason to revalidate the entire tree. (In reply to comment #61) What are the side-effects of revalidating the entire tree ? Does it cause all class files to be loaded or can the revalidation occur without having any lasting overheads (like increased memory consumption and slower revalidation process due to parsing of more complex .class data). My method only seeks to delete stale work/ .java and .class files during web- app deployment. It does not seek to recreate and load them, that can be left to moment of first use (although it would natually lead on to facilitating an automatic recreation function). By opening the .java file and looking for a magic comment and closing the file again, there is no lasting overhead. Since we never loaded the class. Which is just great for a revalidation pass during deployment. I'm a believer there should be a configuration mode of TC which is watertight, such that no amount of abuse will make the things fail in a way that bites you. The work/ directory is a nice speedup but the implementation is more a hack than an optimization, since it clearly breaks down in situations you wouldn't expect. This bug/problem hits developers a lot more than production upgrades. -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-07 15:18 --- Daryl, see comments #35 - #45 and the 4 patch files I posted in the Attachment section. The patch I submitted in March completely fixes this problem in a manner similar to your suggestion. The patch works by storing the timestamp of the .jsp and all its dependent .jsps as member data in the compiled servlet. The isOutDated() method was modified to compare the timestamp of the .jsp against the added timestamps using != instead of . (In reply to comment #59) It would be nice to have re-validation maybe that could be implemented using magic .java file comments in the japser output // Jasper-JSP-Prerequisite: foobar/test.jsp 72383828372000 where both the top level source and all included fragments are listed with their Epoch millis for timestamp. Then the process would be to recurse the work/org/apache/ tree, reading all the .java and performing a simple stat() on the source files. This could be done in the background with live requests taking priority to be checked on first access after deployment. -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-08 05:29 --- What are the side-effects of revalidating the entire tree ? Does it cause all class files to be loaded or can the revalidation occur without having any lasting overheads (like increased memory consumption and slower revalidation process due to parsing of more complex .class data). My method only seeks to delete stale work/ .java and .class files during web-app deployment. It does not seek to recreate and load them, that can be left to moment of first use (although it would natually lead on to facilitating an automatic recreation function). By opening the .java file and looking for a magic comment and closing the file again, there is no lasting overhead. Since we never loaded the class. Which is just great for a revalidation pass during deployment. I'm a believer there should be a configuration mode of TC which is watertight, such that no amount of abuse will make the things fail in a way that bites you. The work/ directory is a nice speedup but the implementation is more a hack than an optimization, since it clearly breaks down in situations you wouldn't expect. This bug/problem hits developers a lot more than production upgrades. -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-06 23:51 --- I think this is a significant problem when you really have different organizations building and deploying, e.g., for publicly distributed applications. A common timeline would be: January - release 1.0 of app March - JSP in app is updated April - release 1.1 of app frozen for QA May - user downloads and installs 1.0 June - user downloads and installs 1.1 In this case, Jasper will view the compiled date of the 1.0 JSP as May and view it as newer than the change date of the 1.1 JSP. I gather that the best practice for building a web app for use with Tomcat would be to touch all the JSP's in your web app in your release process so you minimize the risk (although if someone downloads 1.0 after you released 1.1 they can expect a lot of 500 errors from NoSuchMethodError) I believe Jasper really should remove cached JSP's from the work directory when an app is undeployed (or redeployed). I think this is common, important, and quite different than the rather obscure case of rolling back an older version from version control. This would also avoid a performance hit in checking out of date on JSP's and wouldn't surprise people (I wouldn't expect JSP's to be cached after redeploying an app, indeed I think it's surprising behavior!) One of the users of our Web app just hit this issue today: http://www.glassbox.com/forum/forum/addpost?parent=235 and with a little googling you can see others e.g., http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/tomcat-users/200512.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-06 23:59 --- For the next release of your software, I would register an error handler that catches this error, and sends an email with the contents to the tomcat-dev mailing list. (In reply to comment #55) if someone downloads 1.0 after you released 1.1 they can expect a lot of 500 errors from NoSuchMethodError) -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-07 00:11 --- Why not just distribute your app with pre-compilied JSPs and avoid all these problems? -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-07 00:18 --- Our app needs to be portable to a variety of Servlet containers (and for different versions), so we can't precompile for any one server. -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-07 05:54 --- (In reply to comment #55) I believe Jasper really should remove cached JSP's from the work directory when an app is undeployed (or redeployed). I think this is common, important, and quite different than the rather obscure case of rolling back an older version from version control. This would also avoid a performance hit in checking out of date on JSP's and wouldn't surprise people (I wouldn't expect JSP's to be cached after redeploying an app, indeed I think it's surprising behavior!) This is a very good point that I would agree with. It is not upto any external tools to effectively manage the work/ directory for Tomcat. This directory should be self-managing and be implemented on the side of caution, the caching of JSP pages is a benifit not a right. I think the following new rule would work: * The work/ directory is only cleaned of unused contexts when a web-app is undeployed (while the container is running, aka hot-undeploy) or found to no longer exist after all configuration parsing has been done at container startup. Although it is somewhat difficult to manage web-app upgrades taking place when the container is shutdown. Which I'd say was a pretty common event. One way around that situation would be to detect a web-app update has taken place. The simplest for TC (and the sys-admin) way I can think of, is for TC to remember the exact timestamp on the WEB-INF/web.xml file which the pre-compiled pages relate to. Make it create an empty file and touch up the timestamp to match the real web.xml as work/web.xml.timestamp. The sys-admin must then only touch the WEB-INF/web.xml (when he upgrades his web-app while the container is stopped). When TC boots up again it detects the timestamp is not equal and presumes the web-app was changed also, this causes a flush of the work/ for that context. The idea being this approach would be a whole lot simpler than re-validating the entire work/ cache from the source JSPs during all webapp deployments. It would be nice to have re-validation maybe that could be implemented using magic .java file comments in the japser output // Jasper-JSP-Prerequisite: foobar/test.jsp 72383828372000 where both the top level source and all included fragments are listed with their Epoch millis for timestamp. Then the process would be to recurse the work/org/apache/ tree, reading all the .java and performing a simple stat() on the source files. This could be done in the background with live requests taking priority to be checked on first access after deployment. When work/* file that have been sucessfully revalidated (or deleted/recreated) have their timestamp updated, so that it is possible for any thread to know if a re-validation is required on a page, since the timestamp will be older than the deployment time of the web-app context. This would have no longterm JVM impact that loading classes might have, we can put what we like in the .java file and access it easily. -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-06 01:46 --- *** Bug 40420 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-11 20:38 --- (In reply to comment #51) I've fixed it, getting the fix incorporated into the codebase appears to be the impossible part. Feel free to use the code from my patch and give feedback if you find any problems. I just wasted a embarrasing amount of time trying to figure out why one of our developers was having problems seeing her changes 'live' on the test machine after changing a JSP file. I'd assumed that since I had Tomcat running in Development mode, it was going to recompile the page when it changed I'm glad to see that the seriousness of this bug has been recognized, and a patch developed... even if it doesn't seem to have the blessing of some of the developers. The patch certainly saved me a lot of hassle. Thanks!! -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-06 14:04 --- (In reply to comment #51) I've fixed it, getting the fix incorporated into the codebase appears to be the impossible part. Feel free to use the code from my patch and give feedback if you find any problems. Thanks, but it seems we will be migrating to JBoss 4.0.4 when the GA version comes out and it shouldn't be an issue anymore. I'm fortunate enough I don't have to use Tomcat standalone. -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-03 21:00 --- (In reply to comment #50) The problem isn't isolated to an edge case, it affects the standard way apps are deployed. Thus the numerous other people who have encountered it. I certainly agree. I encountered this issue multiple times. I took quite some time and flustration to discover this bug. The workaround I currently use is deploying exploded .war contents and setting scp not to preserve timestamps, effectively forcing all copied JSP files to be recompiled. I think the bug is obviously serious and is definately not isolated to an edge case. I'm glad someone is trying to fix it. I've fixed it, getting the fix incorporated into the codebase appears to be the impossible part. Feel free to use the code from my patch and give feedback if you find any problems. -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-04-28 14:05 --- (In reply to comment #48) As I said earlier, I don't think fixing the edge cases is worth adding the related complexity. It's very simple. As for JBoss fixing it, Tomcat fixes it too: you simply need to undeploy/redeploy webapps, and/or add some listener to clean up the work directory, which is trivial to do. If that's all you want to achieve, why did you focus on a complex patch to Jasper ? The problem isn't isolated to an edge case, it affects the standard way apps are deployed. Thus the numerous other people who have encountered it. As for my patch being complex that's just not true. I added 2 fields to the generated servlet class and updated the isOutDated logic to use them. It took all of an hour to code and test. I can't believe you're asking me why I wanted to fix something that is broken rather than bandaid it. -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-04-27 21:35 --- http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBAS-3081?page=all JBoss was one of the last standouts, it was relying on Jasper to decide to recompile or not. No more. Now everything gets recompiled on every redeploy. At least we can count on the correctness of its behavior now. Too bad for the performance that according to some comments here was of such paramount concern. Its also too bad that even with patches charitably submitted, that bugs can't or won't be fixed in Jasper. -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-04-28 00:44 --- (In reply to comment #47) Its also too bad that even with patches charitably submitted, that bugs can't or won't be fixed in Jasper. As I said earlier, I don't think fixing the edge cases is worth adding the related complexity. It's very simple. As for JBoss fixing it, Tomcat fixes it too: you simply need to undeploy/redeploy webapps, and/or add some listener to clean up the work directory, which is trivial to do. If that's all you want to achieve, why did you focus on a complex patch to Jasper ? BTW, feel free to post more useless rants, esp in conjunction with Gili, I enjoy them :) -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-04-06 18:07 --- Anyone? Bueller? -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #16492|0 |1 is obsolete|| Attachment #16493|0 |1 is obsolete|| Attachment #16599|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-03-23 20:10 --- Created an attachment (id=17955) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17955action=view) Compiler.java diff -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-03-23 20:11 --- Created an attachment (id=17956) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17956action=view) Generator.java diff -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-03-23 20:11 --- Created an attachment (id=17957) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17957action=view) JspSourceDependent.java diff -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-03-23 20:12 --- Created an attachment (id=17958) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17958action=view) JspServletWrapper.java diff -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453.
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=33453
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-03-22 18:54 ---
Jonathan, just to clairfy: WebSphere doesn't store the timestamp information
in comments - what is stored in comments is informational data that can be
used to help debug problems.
The timestamps used by the outdated checks are stored in the generated
classfile as part of the _jspx_dependants List. If you were to look at the
generated .java source you would see, for example:
private static String[] _jspx_dependants;
static {
_jspx_dependants = new String[2];
_jspx_dependants[0] = /Banner.jsp^1082410708000^Mon Apr 19 17:38:28 EDT
2004;
_jspx_dependants[1] = /Footer.jsp^1077657462000^Tue Feb 24 16:17:42 EST
2004;
}
The timestamp simply follows a dependent's path information.
The data in comments the I referred to in post #24 is more this sort of thing:
e:/mytempdir/x.ear/y.war/WEB-INF/classes/_ibmjsp/_jsp1.java was generated @
Thu Mar 16 14:03:16 EST 2006
IBM WebSphere Application Server - ND, 6.1.0.0
Build Number: v0611.54
Build Date: 3/16/06
The JSP engine configuration parameters were set as follows:
classDebugInfo = [false]
debugEnabled =[false]
deprecation = [false]
compileWithAssert = [false]
etc. etc. etc.
Hope this helps.
--
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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-03-23 01:02 --- (In reply to comment #36) Scott, thanks! That helps a whole lot. I hadn't considered storing the lastModified times of the dependencies as member data of the servlet. It is the ideal place. In fact, Tomcat already stores the dependency list there. I am currently testing a fix which stores the dependant lastModified times there, as well as the lastModified time of the .jsp (rather than modify the timestamp of the .class and .java files). The comparisons made are all != instead of . I will post a new patch once I've tested my changes more thorougly. -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-03-23 01:44 --- Jonathan, I have one caveat about using the servlet member data for the storing the timestamp of the JSP itself and using it for outdated check instead of using the JSP source and class file timestamps. The problem is that the servlet class has to be loaded in order to retrieve this data. Therefore, you wouldn't know a servlet class file was outdated until you'd already loaded it once (first request). We decided that this 'lag' was ok for dependency checking (which by the way is turned off by default in WebSphere) but did not like this lag for the top-level JSP reloading. As I said, just a caveat. -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-03-21 23:45 --- I think the patch files are backwards (show how to remove the fix) but that doesn't make this bug less important. We just got bit by this thing again... every couple of month at my company. It's time to bite the bullet and make a one-off version. Is it ever going to be fixed? -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-03-22 00:22 --- (In reply to comment #32) Sorry for getting the patch backwards. Not that it matters, it will probably never be incorporated any way, due to the co-location of a certain person's head with his ass. Do the votes matter? I am the only one voting for this, perhaps if a few more people used their votes it would show up on a list somewhere, causing some action to be taken. Other than patching Tomcat, here's what I recommend, in order of preference: 1) Don't use Tomcat. 2) Don't use JSPs. 4) Precompile your JSPs as part of your build process. -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-03-22 03:29 --- Jonathoan, I was about to try using your patch and noticed a problem. You are using the date of the JSP file to stamp the class file but the isOutDated() method is also taking into account the times of the included JSP files. This can cause a JSP file to be re-compiled on every hit if it includes a file that has a later date. For example, if a.jsp is time-stamped 9:00 and it includes b.jsp which stamped 10:00, then isOutDated () will always return true because the time of the included file is greater than 9:00. Then when you assign the earlier time to the class file, this check will fail again the next time around. I think a better solution is to set the time of the class file to the greatest time of the compiled file AND ALL of it's dependants. In the above scenario, the class file would get a time stamp of 10:00 instead of 9:00 and subsequent checks of isOutDated would return false as expected. The only problem I can forsee is if someone updates the included file, THEN rolls back the original file. That seems like a very obscure case and my solution is still better than the current solution which doesn't account for rollbacks at all (and also wouldn't handle the obscure case). I will attempt a solution but will be on vacation soon so it may be a while before I'm able to post any patches. -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-11-16 15:42 --- (In reply to comment #28) Created an attachment (id=16599) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16599action=view) [edit] rebuilt jasper-compiler.jar Here is a rebuilt jasper-compiler.jar that incorporates my proposed patch. For anyone who needs a fix and doesn't want to download, patch, and rebuild. Hello Jonathan, i've tried tu use your jasper-compiler.jar into TC 5.5.12, because we have a problem to make Tomcat reload and compile modified JSPs on fly, but an exception is thrown when Jasper try to compile the JSP. i haven't try to patch an rebuilt yet. Here is the root cause of the stack trace, it seem like an import from an Eclipse library : java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.env.NameEnvironmentAnswer.init(Lorg/eclipse/jdt/internal/compiler/env/IBinaryType;)V org.apache.jasper.compiler.JDTCompiler$1.findType(JDTCompiler.java:214) org.apache.jasper.compiler.JDTCompiler$1.findType(JDTCompiler.java:183) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.lookup.LookupEnvironment.askForType(LookupEnvironment.java:119) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.lookup.PackageBinding.getTypeOrPackage(PackageBinding.java:178) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.lookup.Scope.getPackage(Scope.java:2111) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.ast.QualifiedTypeReference.getTypeBinding(QualifiedTypeReference.java:62) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.ast.TypeReference.resolveType(TypeReference.java:141) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.ast.TypeReference.resolveSuperType(TypeReference.java:104) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.lookup.ClassScope.findSupertype(ClassScope.java:1088) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.lookup.ClassScope.connectSuperclass(ClassScope.java:755) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.lookup.ClassScope.connectTypeHierarchy(ClassScope.java:927) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.lookup.CompilationUnitScope.connectTypeHierarchy(CompilationUnitScope.java:254) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.lookup.LookupEnvironment.completeTypeBindings(LookupEnvironment.java:195) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.Compiler.beginToCompile(Compiler.java:301) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.Compiler.compile(Compiler.java:315) org.apache.jasper.compiler.JDTCompiler.generateClass(JDTCompiler.java:387) org.apache.jasper.compiler.Compiler.compile(Compiler.java:288) org.apache.jasper.compiler.Compiler.compile(Compiler.java:267) org.apache.jasper.compiler.Compiler.compile(Compiler.java:255) org.apache.jasper.JspCompilationContext.compile(JspCompilationContext.java:557) org.apache.jasper.servlet.JspServletWrapper.service(JspServletWrapper.java:293) org.apache.jasper.servlet.JspServlet.serviceJspFile(JspServlet.java:291) org.apache.jasper.servlet.JspServlet.service(JspServlet.java:241) javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:802) -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-11-16 17:05 --- Fabien, The jasper-compiler.jar I built was against 5.5.9, I think that's the problem. It should work just fine if you patch and rebuild. -Jonathan (In reply to comment #30) (In reply to comment #28) Created an attachment (id=16599) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16599action=view) [edit] [edit] rebuilt jasper-compiler.jar Here is a rebuilt jasper-compiler.jar that incorporates my proposed patch. For anyone who needs a fix and doesn't want to download, patch, and rebuild. Hello Jonathan, i've tried tu use your jasper-compiler.jar into TC 5.5.12, because we have a problem to make Tomcat reload and compile modified JSPs on fly, but an exception is thrown when Jasper try to compile the JSP. i haven't try to patch an rebuilt yet. Here is the root cause of the stack trace, it seem like an import from an Eclipse library : java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.env.NameEnvironmentAnswer.init(Lorg/eclipse/jdt/internal/compiler/env/IBinaryType;)V org.apache.jasper.compiler.JDTCompiler$1.findType(JDTCompiler.java:214) org.apache.jasper.compiler.JDTCompiler$1.findType(JDTCompiler.java:183) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.lookup.LookupEnvironment.askForType(LookupEnvironment.java:119) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.lookup.PackageBinding.getTypeOrPackage(PackageBinding.java:178) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.lookup.Scope.getPackage(Scope.java:2111) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.ast.QualifiedTypeReference.getTypeBinding(QualifiedTypeReference.java:62) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.ast.TypeReference.resolveType(TypeReference.java:141) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.ast.TypeReference.resolveSuperType(TypeReference.java:104) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.lookup.ClassScope.findSupertype(ClassScope.java:1088) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.lookup.ClassScope.connectSuperclass(ClassScope.java:755) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.lookup.ClassScope.connectTypeHierarchy(ClassScope.java:927) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.lookup.CompilationUnitScope.connectTypeHierarchy(CompilationUnitScope.java:254) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.lookup.LookupEnvironment.completeTypeBindings(LookupEnvironment.java:195) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.Compiler.beginToCompile(Compiler.java:301) org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.Compiler.compile(Compiler.java:315) org.apache.jasper.compiler.JDTCompiler.generateClass(JDTCompiler.java:387) org.apache.jasper.compiler.Compiler.compile(Compiler.java:288) org.apache.jasper.compiler.Compiler.compile(Compiler.java:267) org.apache.jasper.compiler.Compiler.compile(Compiler.java:255) org.apache.jasper.JspCompilationContext.compile(JspCompilationContext.java:557) org.apache.jasper.servlet.JspServletWrapper.service(JspServletWrapper.java:293) org.apache.jasper.servlet.JspServlet.serviceJspFile(JspServlet.java:291) org.apache.jasper.servlet.JspServlet.service(JspServlet.java:241) javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:802) -- 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 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
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=33453. 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=33453 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-19 22:59 --- We got bit by this bug again today! How can I impress on the developers the seriousness of this issue? We need to touch every JSP file when we deploy a webapp because we cannot trust that Tomcat will recompile the things that need to be. This causes large delays to the end users that are unlucky enough to hit the website first. If you revert your JSP files to an older branch, you also have to remember to touch them (many CM systems revert the dates to the older version which still pass the comparison). I think Jonathon's fix will address every realistic scenario.Please use his patch! -- 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]
