RE: [JBoss-dev] HEAD Build: numerous failure

2002-10-08 Thread Sacha Labourey
I think the reason is the JVM size that is necessary (-Xmx): it must be higher probably. Which is why, doing it step by step succeeds: as numerous steps are already done, the memory is simply exhausted later. -Message d'origine- De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]De la

RE: [JBoss-dev] README :: Thirdparty structure changed

2002-10-08 Thread Sacha Labourey
One day Subversion will save us from CVS ;) http://subversion.tigris.org/ -Message d'origine- De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]De la part de David Jencks Envoyé : lundi, 7 octobre 2002 23:10 À : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Objet : Re: [JBoss-dev] README ::

RE: [JBoss-dev] HEAD Build: numerous failure

2002-10-08 Thread Sacha Labourey
Here is one I got on 3.0 with jdk 1.4.0_01-b03 on windows: I simply think that the new libs introduce more memory overhead [xdoclet] Generating output for 'org.jboss.management.j2ee.MessageDrivenBean ' using template file 'jar:file:/J:/CVS_HOME/jboss-3.0/tools/lib/xdoclet.jar!/xd

[JBoss-dev] jboss-all daily clean failed

2002-10-08 Thread chris
= ==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://www.lubega.com FOR DETAILS= = JAVA VERSION DETAILS java version 1.3.1_03 Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard

Re: [JBoss-dev] JBoss3.2-Tomcat4.1.10

2002-10-08 Thread Remy Maucherat
Scott M Stark wrote: If you look at the Embedded usage in the JBoss service it is not doing much. Being able to run off a sar with the minimum elements from tomcat would be good, but I want to keep the ability to run with a pristine tomcat dist. Using the normal Tomcat startup code directly

[JBoss-dev] [AUTOMATED] (HEAD) JBoss compilation failed

2002-10-08 Thread chris
= ==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://www.lubega.com FOR DETAILS= = JAVA VERSION DETAILS java version 1.3.1_03 Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard

[JBoss-dev] JBoss 3.0.3 Bug: typo in TransactionImpl + trying to change Tx inenlist exception

2002-10-08 Thread Marko trukelj
Title: JBoss 3.0.3 Bug: typo in TransactionImpl + trying to change Tx in enlist exception (using: JBoss-3.0.3-src) There is a typo in TransactionImpl disassociateCurrentThread(). tx.associateCurrentThread() is called instead of tx.disassociateCurrentThread() There is another more

[JBoss-dev] Checking out the main branch code, use jboss-head

2002-10-08 Thread Scott M Stark
SF mail seems hours behind so I don't know if there is a mail in the backlog from Jason describing the last changes he made to create the jboss-3.0, jboss-3.2, etc version modules with jboss-all being the main branch. If there is, this applies to the CVSROOT/modules file version 1.188 which

[JBoss-dev] jboss-all daily clean failed

2002-10-08 Thread chris
= ==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://www.lubega.com FOR DETAILS= = JAVA VERSION DETAILS java version 1.4.0_01 Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard

RE: [JBoss-dev] HEAD Build: numerous failure

2002-10-08 Thread Jason Dillon
Using build.sh or build.bat? --jason On Tue, 8 Oct 2002, Sacha Labourey wrote: I think the reason is the JVM size that is necessary (-Xmx): it must be higher probably. Which is why, doing it step by step succeeds: as numerous steps are already done, the memory is simply exhausted later.

RE: [JBoss-dev] README :: Thirdparty structure changed

2002-10-08 Thread Jason Dillon
I hope so... but I do not think there are plans to go away from SourceForge anytime soon. Perhaps they will start using somthing better sometime this century... --jason On Tue, 8 Oct 2002, Sacha Labourey wrote: One day Subversion will save us from CVS ;)

RE: [JBoss-dev] HEAD Build: numerous failure

2002-10-08 Thread Jason Dillon
I do not think that is possible... could be a problem with 1.4.1. I verified that clean builds of all projects build correctly with 1.3.1 (using the new module names that is... did anyone get that email? I sent it hours agao?). --jason On Tue, 8 Oct 2002, Sacha Labourey wrote: Here is

[JBoss-dev] FWD: README :: JBoss Projects Build System (fwd)

2002-10-08 Thread Jason Dillon
Looks like mail is slow these days, so I am copying this again... * * * I have just verified that all of the branches for the currently active JBoss versions build correctly out of the box. I did however need to make some modifications to the CVSROOT/modules file to make this work correctly

[JBoss-dev] jboss-all daily clean failed

2002-10-08 Thread chris
= ==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://www.lubega.com FOR DETAILS= = JAVA VERSION DETAILS java version 1.3.1_03 Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard

[JBoss-dev] jboss-all daily clean failed

2002-10-08 Thread chris
= ==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://www.lubega.com FOR DETAILS= = JAVA VERSION DETAILS java version 1.4.0_01 Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard

[JBoss-dev] [AUTOMATED] (HEAD) JBoss compilation failed

2002-10-08 Thread chris
= ==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://www.lubega.com FOR DETAILS= = JAVA VERSION DETAILS java version 1.4.0_01 Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard

Re: [JBoss-dev] [AUTOMATED] (HEAD) JBoss compilation failed

2002-10-08 Thread Chris Kimpton
Hi, _buildmagic:init: Trying to override old definition of task property BUILD FAILED file:/disk/orig/home/lubega/jbossro/jboss-all/build/../tools/etc/buildfragments/tools.ent:29: taskdef class xdoclet.modules.jmx.JMXDocletTask cannot be found We've got past the other problems - but

[JBoss-dev] jboss-all daily clean failed

2002-10-08 Thread chris
= ==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://www.lubega.com FOR DETAILS= = JAVA VERSION DETAILS java version 1.3.1_03 Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard

[JBoss-dev] [AUTOMATED] (HEAD) JBoss compilation failed

2002-10-08 Thread chris
= ==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://www.lubega.com FOR DETAILS= = JAVA VERSION DETAILS java version 1.3.1_03 Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard

[JBoss-dev] jboss-all daily clean failed

2002-10-08 Thread chris
= ==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://www.lubega.com FOR DETAILS= = JAVA VERSION DETAILS java version 1.4.0_01 Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard

RE: [JBoss-dev] HEAD Build: numerous failure

2002-10-08 Thread Sacha Labourey
build.bat -Message d'origine- De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]De la part de Jason Dillon Envoye : mardi, 8 octobre 2002 10:37 A : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Objet : RE: [JBoss-dev] HEAD Build: numerous failure Using build.sh or build.bat? --jason On Tue, 8 Oct

RE: [JBoss-dev] HEAD Build: numerous failure

2002-10-08 Thread Sacha Labourey
It wasn't with 1.4.1, but with 1.4.0. Maybe that was just my particular setup. Let's wait to have more user feedback to see if I am the only one having this issue. -Message d'origine- De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]De la part de Jason Dillon Envoye : mardi, 8

Re: [JBoss-dev] JBoss 3.0.3 Bug: typo in TransactionImpl + trying to change Tx in enlist exception

2002-10-08 Thread David Jencks
Can you please file two bug reports for these? (please assign them to me if possible) If you can supply any kind of example to reproduce the second bug I would appreciate it. I find it mysterious because the code for LocalTx is supposed to return connections to the pool only after the

[JBoss-dev] [ jboss-Bugs-608790 ] [3.0.2]Hot deploy of unpackaged SAR bug?

2002-10-08 Thread noreply
Bugs item #608790, was opened at 2002-09-13 07:41 You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=608790group_id=22866 Category: JBossMX Group: v3.0 Rabbit Hole Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 4 Submitted By: Chris Kimpton (kimptoc) Assigned to:

[JBoss-dev] [ jboss-Bugs-620254 ] A typo in TransactionImpl

2002-10-08 Thread noreply
Bugs item #620254, was opened at 2002-10-08 16:31 You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=620254group_id=22866 Category: JBossTX Group: v3.0 Rabbit Hole Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Marko Strukelj (mstruk) Assigned to:

[JBoss-dev] [ jboss-Bugs-620254 ] A typo in TransactionImpl

2002-10-08 Thread noreply
Bugs item #620254, was opened at 2002-10-08 16:31 You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=620254group_id=22866 Category: JBossTX Group: v3.0 Rabbit Hole Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Marko Strukelj (mstruk) Assigned to:

[JBoss-dev] [ jboss-Bugs-620262 ] Trying to change Tx in enlist exception

2002-10-08 Thread noreply
Bugs item #620262, was opened at 2002-10-08 16:44 You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=620262group_id=22866 Category: JBossCX Group: v3.0 Rabbit Hole Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Marko Strukelj (mstruk) Assigned to:

[JBoss-dev] [ jboss-Bugs-620293 ] oracle-jbossmq-service.xml buggy

2002-10-08 Thread noreply
Bugs item #620293, was opened at 2002-10-08 15:18 You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=620293group_id=22866 Category: JBossMQ Group: v3.0 Rabbit Hole Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Bernd Zeitler (frito) Assigned to:

Re: [JBoss-dev] README :: Thirdparty structure changed

2002-10-08 Thread Tom Coleman
Food for thought? From www.dictionary.com Modesty - The quality or state of being modest; that lowly temper which accompanies a moderate estimate of one's own worth and importance; absence of self-assertion, arrogance, and presumption; humility respecting

Re: [JBoss-dev] Fixing module defintions now for head, 3.0 3.2

2002-10-08 Thread Tom Coleman
Why don't we set up a CVS testbed somewhere to test CVS changes? You (editorial 'you') don't (shouldn't) commit changes to code without thorough testing. Considering what's at risk, it seems to me that CVS changes should be made even more cautiously. This project already has too many 'moving

[JBoss-dev] How is Constructor Info used?

2002-10-08 Thread Matt Munz
JMX gurus, When I first saw XMBean XML, I assumed that constructor/ referred to the constructor for the resource (model object). On a closer look, it appears that this information (ModelMBeanConstructorInfo) refers only to the constructor for the MB itself. Is this information being used

Re: [JBoss-dev] jboss-all daily clean failed

2002-10-08 Thread Chris Kimpton
Hi, They are kept on the lubega server - only... Chris - Original Message - From: Jason Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 10:38 AM Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] jboss-all daily clean failed Hey... where do the scripts that controll the nightly

Re: [JBoss-dev] [AUTOMATED] (HEAD) JBoss compilation failed

2002-10-08 Thread Langelage, Frank
I had the same problem yesterday. I've deleted jboss-all (and directory jboss which temporary existed) and made a new checkout. Now compilation is fine again. Regards Frank Chris Kimpton wrote: Hi, _buildmagic:init: Trying to override old definition of task property BUILD FAILED

[JBoss-dev] [ jboss-Bugs-620254 ] A typo in TransactionImpl

2002-10-08 Thread noreply
Bugs item #620254, was opened at 2002-10-08 09:31 You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=620254group_id=22866 Category: JBossTX Group: v3.0 Rabbit Hole Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Marko Strukelj (mstruk) Assigned to:

[JBoss-dev] [ jboss-Bugs-620254 ] A typo in TransactionImpl

2002-10-08 Thread noreply
Bugs item #620254, was opened at 2002-10-08 09:31 You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=620254group_id=22866 Category: JBossTX Group: v3.0 Rabbit Hole Status: Closed Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Submitted By: Marko Strukelj (mstruk) Assigned

Re: [JBoss-dev] Fixing module defintions now for head, 3.0 3.2

2002-10-08 Thread David Jencks
Ummm think about it... for CVSROOT changes that would mean being easily able to get a mirror of the project cvs files (the blah.java,v files), which AFAIK sourceforge does not enable. Perhaps a more doable alternative is a list of what to check after CVSROOT changes. david jencks On

Re: [JBoss-dev] JBoss 3.0.3 Bug: typo in TransactionImpl + tryingto change Tx in enlist exception

2002-10-08 Thread Marko trukelj
I am trying to put together a working example to reproduce the problem. I will try to go along the following lines: limit connection pool to 2 connections. Create 10 threads that invoke on the server side : ut.begin(); ds.getConnection(); c.close(); And hope to see the error happen. But I'm

Re: [JBoss-dev] README :: Thirdparty structure changed

2002-10-08 Thread Tom Coleman
Oops. Missed an important one... From www.dictionary.com Ego - An inflated feeling of pride in your superiority to others --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf

Re: [JBoss-dev] How is Constructor Info used?

2002-10-08 Thread Juha-P Lindfors
On Tue, 8 Oct 2002, Matt Munz wrote: When I first saw XMBean XML, I assumed that constructor/ referred to the constructor for the resource (model object). On a closer look, it appears that this information (ModelMBeanConstructorInfo) refers only to the constructor for the MB itself. it

Re: [JBoss-dev] [AUTOMATED] (HEAD) JBoss compilation failed

2002-10-08 Thread Scott M Stark
The head revision cannot be checked out using the jboss-all module alias any longer. The jboss-head alias must be used instead. If you successfully wade through the dump of CVSROOT/module changes and associated mails this is the summary statement: - To checkout 3.0 use: cvs co -r Branch_3_0

RE: [JBoss-dev] README :: Thirdparty structure changed

2002-10-08 Thread Bill Burke
How about these definitions: Aggravation: When somebody fucks up CVS and you waste a whole day of development. Annoyance: When somebody posts stupid definitions from www.dictionary.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tom Coleman

Re: [JBoss-dev] Fixing module defintions now for head, 3.0 3.2

2002-10-08 Thread Jason Dillon
To effectivly test I would need to replicate the entire repository. --jason On Tue, 8 Oct 2002, Tom Coleman wrote: Why don't we set up a CVS testbed somewhere to test CVS changes? You (editorial 'you') don't (shouldn't) commit changes to code without thorough testing. Considering

RE: [JBoss-dev] Fixing module defintions now for head, 3.0 3.2

2002-10-08 Thread Matt Munz
To effectivly test I would need to replicate the entire repository. FWIW, this could easily be done with rsync, but, as David pointed out, SF.net probably doesn't allow this level of access to their servers. - Matt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL

RE: [JBoss-dev] How is Constructor Info used?

2002-10-08 Thread Matt Munz
Juha, It could be worse -- I could be trying to interpret legal documents ;) it is not clearly defined which it should refer to in case of MMB. It might be better defined in JMX 1.2 version of the spec. Let me reccommend that the resource object constructor info be given a (defined)

[JBoss-dev] CVS lock ?

2002-10-08 Thread Peter Fagerlund
cvs server: [12:47:41] waiting for anoncvs_jboss's lock in /cvsroot/jboss/jboss-j2ee/src --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___

Re: [JBoss-dev] JBoss3.2-Tomcat4.1.10

2002-10-08 Thread Scott M Stark
Because more people use Tomcat and want to be able to integrate with existing distributions that they can run standalone. No one has asked for this with Jetty as yet. Scott Stark Chief Technology Officer JBoss Group, LLC - Original Message

[JBoss-dev] [ jboss-Bugs-620440 ] Hot deploy DeploymentException

2002-10-08 Thread noreply
Bugs item #620440, was opened at 2002-10-08 16:37 You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=620440group_id=22866 Category: CatalinaBundle Group: v3.0 Rabbit Hole Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Don Laidlaw (dlaidlaw) Assigned

[JBoss-dev] somebody has cvs lock in jboss-j2ee/src

2002-10-08 Thread Bill Burke
...waiting for maximal's lock in /cvsroot/jboss/jboss-j2ee/src Please somebody remove it. Thanks, Bill --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf

[JBoss-dev] [ jboss-Patches-620459 ] Workaround for buggy Oracle driver

2002-10-08 Thread noreply
Patches item #620459, was opened at 2002-10-08 21:16 You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376687aid=620459group_id=22866 Category: JAWS (inactive) Group: v3.2 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Christian Sprajc (totmacherr) Assigned

[JBoss-dev] Automated JBoss(Branch_3_0) Testsuite Results: 8-October-2002

2002-10-08 Thread scott . stark
Number of tests run: 942 Successful tests: 939 Errors:2 Failures: 1 [time of test: 8 October 2002 15:13 GMT] [java.version: 1.3.1] [java.vendor: Apple Computer, Inc.]

[JBoss-dev] [ jboss-Bugs-620514 ] MQ OutOfMemoryException

2002-10-08 Thread noreply
Bugs item #620514, was opened at 2002-10-08 18:18 You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=620514group_id=22866 Category: JBossMQ Group: v3.0 Rabbit Hole Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Steve Wolfangel (swolfangel) Assigned

RE: [JBoss-dev] HEAD Build: numerous failure

2002-10-08 Thread Jason Dillon
If you run the build by hand with -Xmx640m does it function? This is what build.sh uses. Newer build.bat (coming soon) will also include this. --jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:jboss- [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Sacha Labourey Sent: Tuesday, October

RE: [JBoss-dev] Design: Plans to decouple JBoss from log4j

2002-10-08 Thread Jason Dillon
It is too bad commons logging does not provide abstractions for a ContextStack or ContextMap similar to Log4j's NDC and MDC. These are valuable constructs. Do you know anyone on the commons logging team? --jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:jboss- [EMAIL

Re: [JBoss-dev] Design: Plans to decouple JBoss from log4j

2002-10-08 Thread David Jencks
Apparently several people have had trouble with jakarta-commons logging, including xdoclet; this got mentioned on their list: http://www.qos.ch/logging/thinkAgain.html Personally I'd be in favor of unwrapping log4j and using it asis. I'm not convinced that the debug/trace split buys us very

Re: [JBoss-dev] Design: Plans to decouple JBoss from log4j

2002-10-08 Thread Scott M Stark
Unless there is a clear advantange to commons over the generalization Sacha did it is not worth the trouble to switch to an alternate logging wrapper. Scott Stark Chief Technology Officer JBoss Group, LLC - Original Message - From: