[JBoss-dev] Re: Problem with minimal config in Branch_4_0

2006-05-05 Thread Tom Elrod
Not really. The SerializationStreamFactory will try to statically load both java and jboss serialization. There is a try/catch around the loading of the jboss serialization, but only catches Exception. However, when tries to load it and JBossObjectOutputStream is not found, throws a

[JBoss-dev] RE: Problem with minimal config in Branch_4_0

2006-05-05 Thread Dimitris Andreadis
What is the algorithm to decide which serialization manager to use? Is there a flag to override the choice? If the choice is to explicitly use JBossSerialization and it cannot be loaded, then that's an error to be reported. If the choice is JavaSerialization, then you shoulnd't even attempt to

[JBoss-dev] Re: Problem with minimal config in Branch_4_0

2006-05-05 Thread Tom Elrod
I have updated the jboss-remoting.jar (1.4.2.GA) to include code change to org.jboss.remoting.serialization.SerializationStreamFactory where in it's static block of loading serialization managers, if the jboss serialization manager is not found, will write out warning to log and proceed. If

[JBoss-dev] Re: Problem with minimal config in Branch_4_0

2006-05-04 Thread Tom Elrod
I have locally changed server/build.xml to include the 15 classes needed from remoting into the jboss-minimal.jar. However, is going to still need jboss serialization classes (see below). Should jboss-serialization.jar be added to minimal lib directory? 14:14:29,494 INFO [NamingService]

[JBoss-dev] RE: Problem with minimal config in Branch_4_0

2006-05-04 Thread Dimitris Andreadis
Is JBossSerialization actually, or this is just the API, in which case you can just bundle the missing classes? JBossSerialization is about 121Kb, and jboss-minimal 190kb. -Original Message- From: Tom Elrod Sent: 04 May, 2006 22:48 To: Dimitris Andreadis Cc: Scott M Stark; Clebert

[JBoss-dev] RE: Problem with minimal config in Branch_4_0

2006-05-04 Thread Dimitris Andreadis
I meant actually used by remoting in this setup, sorry. -Original Message- From: Dimitris Andreadis Sent: 04 May, 2006 23:34 To: Tom Elrod Cc: Scott M Stark; Clebert Suconic; QA; jboss-development@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: RE: Problem with minimal config in Branch_4_0

[JBoss-dev] RE: Problem with minimal config in Branch_4_0

2006-05-03 Thread Dimitris Andreadis
http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBAS-3171 -Original Message- From: Scott M Stark Sent: 02 May, 2006 07:34 To: Clebert Suconic; Tom Elrod Cc: Dimitris Andreadis; QA; 'jboss-development@lists.sourceforge.net' Subject: RE: Problem with minimal config in Branch_4_0 Ok, this

[JBoss-dev] RE: Problem with minimal config in Branch_4_0

2006-05-01 Thread Scott M Stark
It does not make sense to add the full remoting jar as there is no dependency on this other than the serialization classes. This comes back to the fact that org/jboss/invocation needs to be refactored into a separate legacy remoting jar, and org.jboss.remoting.serialization included in it or

[JBoss-dev] Re: Problem with minimal config in Branch_4_0

2006-05-01 Thread Tom Elrod
They are not broken out in terms of jar currently (all in one jar). However, the org.jboss.remoting.serialization package can be broken out, but will need to include org.jboss.remoting.loading.ObjectInputStreamWithClassLoader as well. Scott M Stark wrote: It does not make sense to add the

[JBoss-dev] RE: Problem with minimal config in Branch_4_0

2006-05-01 Thread Scott M Stark
Why is that? We need to be doing a better job of minimizing cross package dependencies to allow for cleaner reuse of functionality. -Original Message- From: Tom Elrod Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 12:33 PM To: Scott M Stark Cc: Tom Elrod; Dimitris Andreadis; QA;

[JBoss-dev] RE: Problem with minimal config in Branch_4_0

2006-05-01 Thread Clebert Suconic
MarshalledInvocation is initializing org.jboss.invocation.unified.interfaces.JavaSerializationManager on its static block, to avoid the dependency on the streaming Tom mentioned. public class MarshalledInvocation extends Invocation implements java.io.Externalizable { //

[JBoss-dev] RE: Problem with minimal config in Branch_4_0

2006-05-01 Thread Scott M Stark
So what does this mean, that the custom object input stream is not needed? -Original Message- From: Clebert Suconic Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 12:49 PM To: Scott M Stark; Tom Elrod Cc: Dimitris Andreadis; QA; 'jboss-development@lists.sourceforge.net' Subject: RE: Problem with minimal

[JBoss-dev] RE: Problem with minimal config in Branch_4_0

2006-05-01 Thread Clebert Suconic
Eh eh... sorry, I should have been clearer. There is an implementation under org.jboss.invocation.unified package. If that package is available under the minimal configuration, we don't need to add the streaming Tom mentioned. -Original Message- From: Scott M Stark Sent: Monday, May

[JBoss-dev] RE: Problem with minimal config in Branch_4_0

2006-05-01 Thread Scott M Stark
Ok, this package already is in the jboss-minmal.jar -Original Message- From: Clebert Suconic Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 9:20 PM To: Scott M Stark; Tom Elrod Cc: Dimitris Andreadis; QA; 'jboss-development@lists.sourceforge.net' Subject: RE: Problem with minimal config in Branch_4_0 Eh

[JBoss-dev] Re: Problem with minimal config in Branch_4_0

2006-04-28 Thread Tom Elrod
The problem stems from NamingService using MarshalledInvocation, which now requires org.jboss.remoting.serialization.IMarshalledValue and org.jboss.remoting.serialization.SerializationStreamFactory (which is found within jboss-remoting.jar). However, jboss-remoting.jar is not included within