I'm running 2.2.1. I'm really being lazy here and should go investigate
this myself. Let me know if you have any insight though.
Thanks,
Bill
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Scott
M Stark
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 10:50 PM
To:
After some sleep - I have come to understand that the shell to be used -
should ofcource be JMX based thus enable'ing using one tool for a whole
cluster and also for geographically unbound service'ing ... This then allows
the components to be written as MBeans - plugin a new service been - be it
On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Jay Walters wrote:
You guys wouldn't want to hear my stories... suffice it to say I agree that
if you can't understand to edit the properties files by hand you probably
shouldn't be editing them with a GUI...
That's a much different assertion than there
On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Jay Walters wrote:
I don't edit my xml by hand or by tool, I generate it!
That's not always realistic. It works great if you're writing new
code for JBoss only, but if you have a pile of existing WebLogic JARs, or
you're not free to add arbitrary JavaDoc tags or
And as my final 2c (at least for now) on this, I've used Allaire JRun a fair
amount, they built their admin tool using JSP and running in a separate
webserver (actually Oracle OAS 4.X used to do this too I think.) Anyways,
they had lots of quirky little config files and the JSPs didn't really
Ok, I confess, I edit it with VI. Flushed me right out of the closet...
I am not a normal developer, nor having been an administrator would I like
to be a normal one of those again either.
-Original Message-
From: Aaron Mulder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001
on 1-06-26 16.23, Jay Walters at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't edit my xml by hand or by tool, I generate it!
Cool - that rules ... and can be utilised by many if it has a userfriendly
UI in front ... I would say a generator is a tool - together with a facade -
it is the future ...
/peter
|... am out of topic... but Windows 2000 out-of-the-box can act as a
|router. You can use RRAS (Routing and Remote Access Service) on W2k Server
|and ICS (Internet Connection Sharing) on W2k Pro. Both can NAT.
I didn't know that,
marcf
|
|Just in case you need to do some testing under W2k
yeap that's it JB3.0 and web services...
will fix the cache sync code and then commit the dynamic loading of services
bit
marcf
|-Original Message-
|From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Peter
|Fagerlund
|Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 9:29 AM
|To: [EMAIL
Hi,
Bill:
|- Somebody had a great idea earlier of adding optimistic locking for
|CMP/JAWS. Along with this feature, you could write a specialized
|EntityInstanceInterceptor that did not do transactional locking with
|commit Option 'A'. This would be great for beans that had
|read-only
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: marc fleury [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 20. Juni 2001 05:44
An: Jboss-Development@Lists. Sourceforge. Net
Betreff: [JBoss-dev] micro-kernel design
Dr JUNG, here is one for you... I realize that right now the base is very
static in the
|In fact, if we could lift the logic that is now located in the
|J2eeGlobalDeployer (or say, in the J2eeGlobalDeployer before Mad Andy did
|that mad monster change which simply deleted all the lines ;-) underneath
|the J2eeDeployer at a level above, there is a chance
|that we could also derive
aeh ... look into org.jboss.deployment.scope.* (and please use version 1.7
for J2eeGlobalScopeDeployer ;-). See also
my concurrent email about a kind of abstract deployment framework that could
be
seated on top of JMX, EJB, WAR, RAR, etc.
Main idea is that we introduce a subclass of
A somewhat related feature(I think) is a service that allows a component to
obtain a class loader for a deployed application. Due to shortcomings of
JAAS or the desire to access EJBs, etc. in a deployed application from
an mbean without breaking hot deployment by adding code to the classpath.
Hi CGJ
Uppps, sorry for that but I have some problems with my editor which
sometimes just delete the content of a file and my build CVS update
just also updated this file.
From my point of view just bring 1.7 back.
Sorry, Andy.
- Original Message -
From: Jung , Dr. Christoph [EMAIL
Hi Marc,
seems you've checked in intermediate test code?
Should be as given below?
Added: src/main/org/jboss/test/threading/mbean Threads.java
ThreadsMBean.java
...
// get a random value between 1 and 100
int value = random.nextInt(100);
// 10%
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Georg
Rehfeld
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 11:25 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] High load...
Hi,
Bill:
|- Somebody had a great idea earlier of adding optimistic locking for
Hi,
sorry for wasting bandwidth, I see, you've fixed it already.
seems you've checked in intermediate test code?
regards
Georg
___ ___
| + | |__Georg Rehfeld Woltmanstr. 12 20097 Hamburg
|_|_\ |___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] +49 (40) 23 53 27 10
|My suggestion was intended for the Rabbit Hole and originally
|meant to be used with commit options B/C in case there are
|multiple bean instances when Rabbit Hole is finished.
yes, that would be interesting.
|Multiple instances would be not very usefull with pessimistic
|locking done on the
Hi,
What features from EJB2.0 have been implemented in JBoss 2.4? What features
are currently in development in CVS?
Thanks.
___
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
|Sorry Georg, I don't what planet I was on when I made the option A with
|optimistic locking comment.
Option A with optimistic locking would be interesting.
it is Option A with pessimistic db locking that doesn't really bring
anything new.
He was criticizing the no copy of the cache for a new
That is standard locking, you should see that everywhere unless you can set
some bit to not wait for locks and just abort the statement. SQL*Plus and
JDBC both look the same to the server.
Of course with Oracle it won't block readers, with some other databases you
will block readers in the
|Uppps, sorry for that but I have some problems with my editor which
|sometimes just delete the content of a file and my build CVS update
|just also updated this file.
|From my point of view just bring 1.7 back.
that's a nice one, sorry the cat ate my file, sorry emacs just deleted the
repo...
User: dsundstrom
Date: 01/06/26 11:12:06
Modified:src/main/org/jboss/ejb/plugins/cmp/jdbc/metadata
JDBCApplicationMetaData.java
Log:
Added configurable transaction isolation.
Revision ChangesPath
1.2 +26 -2
User: dsundstrom
Date: 01/06/26 11:12:06
Modified:src/main/org/jboss/ejb/plugins/cmp/jdbc
JDBCStoreManager.java
Log:
Added configurable transaction isolation.
Revision ChangesPath
1.2 +12 -2
we would have to implement the transaction isolation levels correctly in
jboss again I believe that lives at the jbossCMP level. But if we are
going
to support different vendors for the CMP engines we must take this part
out
or at least offer a common API... hmmm must think about it.
I
User: dsundstrom
Date: 01/06/26 11:19:08
Modified:src/main/org/jboss/ejb/plugins/cmp/jdbc/metadata
JDBCApplicationMetaData.java
Log:
fixed type in transaction isolation levels
Revision ChangesPath
1.3 +3 -3
User: starksm
Date: 01/06/26 11:28:35
Modified:src/main/org/jboss/test/perf/interfaces EntityPK.java
Added: src/main/org/jboss/test/perf/interfaces Probe.java
ProbeHome.java
Log:
Add simple method invocation timing tests
Revision Changes
|I added transaction isolation to the new cmp plugin. You can set it by
|adding the transaction-isolation element after the datasource element.
|Valid levels are:
|transaction-none
|transaction-read-committed
|transaction-read-uncommitted
|transaction-repeatable-read
|
User: dsundstrom
Date: 01/06/26 11:31:54
Modified:src/main/org/jboss/ejb/plugins/jaws/metadata
JawsApplicationMetaData.java
Log:
Added configurable transaction isolation level.
Revision ChangesPath
1.7 +25 -1
User: dsundstrom
Date: 01/06/26 11:31:54
Modified:src/main/org/jboss/ejb/plugins/jaws/jdbc JDBCCommand.java
Log:
Added configurable transaction isolation level.
Revision ChangesPath
1.36 +8 -2 jboss/src/main/org/jboss/ejb/plugins/jaws/jdbc/JDBCCommand.java
User: starksm
Date: 01/06/26 11:28:35
Added: src/main/org/jboss/test/perf/test TestProbe.java
Log:
Add simple method invocation timing tests
Revision ChangesPath
1.1 jbosstest/src/main/org/jboss/test/perf/test/TestProbe.java
Index:
To finally bring the JBoss GUI flying let's start
a project for that ;-)
My idea of the JBoss GUI would be a dynamic, expandable
and version aware GUI helping an administrator, deployer
and Developer dealing with JBoss.
The basic requirements for the GUI would be:
- Able to add and remove GUI
User: starksm
Date: 01/06/26 11:23:30
Modified:src/build/subprojects build-perf.xml
Log:
Add a simple call invocation timing testcase
Revision ChangesPath
1.2 +32 -27jbosstest/src/build/subprojects/build-perf.xml
Index: build-perf.xml
User: starksm
Date: 01/06/26 11:28:34
Added: src/main/org/jboss/test/perf/ejb ProbeBean.java
Log:
Add simple method invocation timing tests
Revision ChangesPath
1.1 jbosstest/src/main/org/jboss/test/perf/ejb/ProbeBean.java
Index: ProbeBean.java
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
I don't know if you wanted with user configurable, but for now it will allow
you to play with different levels. I can make it static later.
static?
___
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of marc
fleury
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 1:28 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] High load...
|Sorry Georg, I don't what planet I was on when I made the option A with
|optimistic
Dain,
I really don't think this will work. Please see my previous email.
Bill
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 2:32 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [JBoss-dev] CVS update:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dain
Sundstrom
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 2:20 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] High load...
we would have to implement the transaction isolation levels correctly in
jboss
|Isolation levels and locking are really orthonogal, aren't they?
not entirely for example if we decide to NOT lock at the cache level
something that the new cache design will allow then you need to make sure
that isolation levels are such that you don't corrupt your db.
yes the code that
User: schaefera
Date: 01/06/26 12:00:26
Modified:src/main/org/jboss/deployment/scope
J2eeGlobalScopeDeployer.java
Log:
Fixed what I screwed up and brought version 1.7 back in (Sorry).
Revision ChangesPath
1.9 +497 -0
|Please correct me if I'm wrong(I seem to be wrong about 50% of the
|time :-),
|but, I really don't think you should expose transaction-isolation levels
|within CMP or in the definition of entities. This really belongs in the
|creation of the connection pool. CMP cannot really guarantee that a
I don't know if you wanted with user configurable, but for now it will
allow
you to play with different levels. I can make it static later.
static?
fixed
___
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sorry, didn't get to to line right on this message, and it only went to
marc... read below...
-dain
- Original Message -
From: Dain Sundstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: marc fleury [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 2:24 PM
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Shouldn't expose
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of marc
fleury
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 3:05 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Shouldn't expose transaction-isolation within
CMP
|Please correct me if I'm
On Sun, 24 Jun 2001, Hiram Chirino wrote:
Don't worry, I have the angle covered. I adjusted JMSProviderLoader so that
you can configure where in JNDI to get it's connetion factories from. So
now you configure the MBean with something like:
mbean
Hi Bill,
Sorry Georg, I don't what planet I was on when I made the option A with
optimistic locking comment.
Oh, might be, you had multiple instances with commit option A in
mind? Marc assumed that and seems to be about implementing that.
I have to rethink that scenario before commenting on
All of this is covered in detail in section 17.3.2 of the EJB 2.0 spec. I
think everyone should take a secound and read it (it is only three
paragraphs).
-dain
- Original Message -
From: Bill Burke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 2:52 PM
Subject:
I don't know if you wanted with user configurable, but for now it will
allow
you to play with different levels. I can make it static later.
static?
fixed
Like at compile time, literally 'static' in the java sense static?
Please god, not this again.
Remember that the
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
I think I understand now. Here is some text I found the J2EE tutorial:
You cannot modify the isolation level of a entity beans with
container-managed persistence. These beans use the default isolation level
of the DBMS, which is usually READ_COMMITTED.
I
Hi,
On 2001.06.26 11:24:43 -0400 Georg Rehfeld wrote:
snip
But maybe Bill is right, OL could be used with commit option A
and single bean instances too? I'm not really sure ... no I
don't think so, because then every TX is working on state
possibly modified by another TX and, even worse, with
Hi,
What is a typeless invocation layer and how does it work? (reference would
be fine)
I ran into this problem in several places working on my rule engine
prototype. I think Dr. Jung's solution would solve all the problems I had,
which were not just between mbeans and ejbs, but also between a
Hi,
Forgive me if I am talking nonsense, but doesn't it only make sense to have
transaction isolation per transaction I very much doubt you will find
a db that can support several transaction isolation levels within one
transaction. I can't quite figure out what it would mean, either. So
|I don't think I understand what you are suggesting. However...
|
|Are you familiar with the lock-free versioning/ optimistic locking scheme
|used in interbase/firebird?
|
|transactions are numbered sequentially when they are started.
|
|Each record (version) includes the transaction id of the
These are gone. See the last reply to Hiram's cleanup work.
All that remains is a trivial leak of ASF ThreadGroup objects.
- Original Message -
From: Peter Antman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: JBoss Dev [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 1:13 PM
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Two issues
David Jencks wrote:
Read on - the problem with this occured to a few of us already. Although
none of us mentioned putting it in the container-transaction - that's
interesting. But what if a method at iso 'read-uncommitted' calls a
method in an iso 'serializable' transaction?
thanks,
danch
JMX is one example. I don't need any classes other than JXM and the
classes returned by the JMX invocation on the MBeanServer.
- Original Message -
From: David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 10:12 AM
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] micro-kernel
On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 04:21:12PM -0400, Bill Burke wrote:
Any way, I think I should roll back my change. If you agree
marc, just say
so and it is done.
I don't know any thing about Minerva, so if you want that
changed, someone
else would be better suited. If no one wants
|Please correct me if I'm wrong(I seem to be wrong about 50% of the
|time :-),
|but, I really don't think you should expose transaction-isolation
levels
|within CMP or in the definition of entities. This really belongs
in
the
|creation of the connection pool. CMP cannot
I disagreewell, at least for our app, we have transactions where some
entities really need to be serialized and other entities within the
transaction are just fine with read_committed.
Bill
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of David
|I disagreewell, at least for our app, we have transactions where some
|entities really need to be serialized and other entities within the
|transaction are just fine with read_committed.
we will need to express this in code, but there are really 2 levels of
synchronization that need to
On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Scott M Stark wrote:
These are gone. See the last reply to Hiram's cleanup work.
All that remains is a trivial leak of ASF ThreadGroup objects.
Ok, thats nice. Will you look into it, or should I do it (I have to warn
you tough, my windows of oportunities to work are
|But if they're in the same transaction, they must use the same isolation
|level - per our discussion on the database doing an implicite commit
|when you try to change levels. I don't think it makes logical sense to
|talk about having two different transaction isolation levels in the same
Hi Jim
This will be delivered by JBoss's JSR-77 implementation and
we only need to visualize them.
Mad Andy
-Original Message-
From: Jim Archer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 12:43 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] JBoss Management GUI -
Hi,
since you can't change the transaction isolation after you start the
transaction, the isolation is determined by the outermost isolation
specifier.
david jencks
On 2001.06.26 16:47:16 -0400 danch (Dan Christopherson) wrote:
David Jencks wrote:
Read on - the problem with this occured to a
Posted to jmx-forum by Christophe today...
On 2001.06.26 13:51 Christophe Ebro wrote:
Hello
I am proud to announce that Sun has decided to provide in the packages of
the JMX 1.0 RI some new contribs.
These extensions are:
Remoting
- RemoteMBeanServer class
allows on the client side to
Hi Geeks
Today Sun announced that they added new stuff to the
JMX-RI like remote access to MBeanServers but they
they only released the binary code.
Do we stay with what we have right now or do we want
to move on an replace the actual JBoss RMI-Connector
with the classes from the JMX-RI ?
When
Hi,
David Jencks:
I don't think I understand what you are suggesting. However...
Just as a reminder, my suggestions for mimicked optimistic
locking was:
generate SQL for update/delete with a where clause not only
using the primary key fields, but also the old values of changed
fields / all
Why can't a transaction manage different resources and each of those
resources use a different transaction-isolation level? What's wrong with
that?
Bill
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of David
Jencks
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 5:38
sorry
I didn't see it before, thanks for pinging me privately, no thanks for the html
:(
The
test does cover what you talk about: a remove that is working in parallel with a
passivation.
What I
would really want to do is trigger passivation (in the job thread not C) and
timeouts.
|Why can't a transaction manage different resources and each of those
|resources use a different transaction-isolation level? What's wrong with
|that?
imho nothing
marcf
___
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
User: vharcq
Date: 01/06/26 15:23:15
Modified:src/examples/build build.xml
Log:
As Scott mention, no need to pass parameters, it's magic
Revision ChangesPath
1.9 +6 -28 manual/src/examples/build/build.xml
Index: build.xml
Bill Burke wrote:
Why can't a transaction manage different resources and each of those
resources use a different transaction-isolation level? What's wrong with
that?
If different resources == different DB connections, i suppose it could.
Maybe. But I keep thinking of the isolation level as
Hi,
Bill Burke:
Why can't a transaction manage different resources and each of those
resources use a different transaction-isolation level? What's wrong with
that?
There is nothing wrong with the idea IMHO.
As I told earlier, some DB's (Informix) actually can do such
isolation level
marc fleury wrote:
|But if they're in the same transaction, they must use the same isolation
|level - per our discussion on the database doing an implicite commit
|when you try to change levels. I don't think it makes logical sense to
|talk about having two different transaction isolation
Hi,
David Jencks wrote:
Yes, I was trying to point out that interbase/firebird has been
doing this successfully for 15 years, we can have our container
do it too, here's an algorithm
you left out the most interesting: the algorithm! Please forward!
Someone mentioned that there might be
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of danch
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 6:31 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] High load...
marc fleury wrote:
|But if they're in the same transaction, they must use the same
Bugs item #436550, was opened at 2001-06-26 15:51
You can respond by visiting:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=376685aid=436550group_id=22866
Category: JBossServer
Group: v2.2 (stable)
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Sebastien Sahuc (ssahuc)
Assigned to:
Hi,
Ok, I was thinking of within one db. I'm working on a logical
inconsistency example if you change isolation within one db, but I don't
have it yet. I agree, if you have a loosely coupled distributed
transaction, even on one resource manager, the different branches can have
different
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of David
Jencks
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 6:57 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] High load...
Hi,
Ok, I was thinking of within one db. I'm working on a logical
inconsistency
Hi
Marc Fleury wrote:
precisely, I already fought with Vinay the many instances
speedup fallacy
it's a lie...
if you don't break the pessimistic locking at the db then it is
useless.
so this puts more stress on me to implement it, as it is usefull
already with multiple server instances.
User: starksm
Date: 01/06/26 17:04:12
Modified:src/main/org/jboss/metadata EnvEntryMetaData.java
Log:
Trim space around env-entry-type to avoid ClassNotFound exceptions that
are hard to understand
Revision ChangesPath
1.4 +3 -1
Change Notes item #436564, was opened at 2001-06-26 17:19
You can respond by visiting:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=381174aid=436564group_id=22866
Category: None
Group: v2.4
Status: Open
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Scott M Stark (starksm)
Assigned to: Scott M Stark (starksm)
User: starksm
Date: 01/06/26 17:22:47
Modified:src/main/org/jboss/ejb Tag: Branch_2_4 ContainerFactory.java
Log:
Fix test of the container-interceptor transaction attribute against
the default value of Both
Revision ChangesPath
No revision
User: starksm
Date: 01/06/26 17:23:13
Modified:src/main/org/jboss/metadata Tag: Branch_2_4
EnvEntryMetaData.java
Log:
Trim env type string to avoid ClassNotFound errors
Revision ChangesPath
No revision
No
Hi
who ever it was, said:
I'm thinking of the isolation level as an immutable part of the
transaction - partly because this is how the databases implement it (at
least as far as JDBC goes).
Sure, it would be useful to be able to specify different levels per
bean, but given the
Ok, I'll take a look at the ASF thread group problem tonight.
The jbossmq stuff in the jboss module are:
src/lib/jbossmq.jar
src/lib/gnu-regexp-1.0.8.jar
src/lib/oswego-concurrent.jar
src/lib/log4j.jar
src/client/jbossmq-client.jar
src/client/gnu-regexp-1.0.8.jar
src/client/oswego-concurrent.jar
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Georg
Rehfeld
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 8:17 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] High load...
Hi
who ever it was, said:
I'm thinking of the isolation level as an immutable
User: starksm
Date: 01/06/26 18:05:59
Modified:tomcat/src/main/org/jboss/tomcat/security Tag: Branch_2_4
JBossSecurityMgrRealm.java
Log:
The password String may be null so validate before invoking
toCharArray()
Revision ChangesPath
No
User: starksm
Date: 01/06/26 18:13:53
Modified:tomcat/src/main/org/jboss/tomcat/security
JBossSecurityMgrRealm.java
Log:
Handle null passwords correctly
Revision ChangesPath
1.5 +5 -2
Change Notes item #436590, was opened at 2001-06-26 18:17
You can respond by visiting:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=381174aid=436590group_id=22866
Category: None
Group: v2.4
Status: Open
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Scott M Stark (starksm)
Assigned to: Scott M Stark (starksm)
On Tue, 26 Jun 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
User: starksm
Date: 01/06/26 18:05:59
Modified:tomcat/src/main/org/jboss/tomcat/security Tag: Branch_2_4
JBossSecurityMgrRealm.java
Log:
The password String may be null so validate before invoking
User: starksm
Date: 01/06/26 18:21:39
Modified:src/lib Tag: Branch_2_4 tomcat-service.jar
Log:
Include NPE fix from tomcat/contrib
Revision ChangesPath
No revision
No revision
1.9.6.3 +52 -57
Yes, see http://www.jboss.org/cvs.jsp
Thank you for fixing that so quickly :) I am assuming that was the source
of my NullPointerException. I could fix these things myself, then submit a
diff to ya'll... are there any instructions on getting the cvs version
to build? i.e. what each directory
User: starksm
Date: 01/06/26 18:27:19
Modified:.cvs.jsp
Log:
Add contrib/tomcat and contrib/jetty to the list of cvs modules to
identify them explictly
Revision ChangesPath
1.4 +67 -65newsite/cvs.jsp
Index: cvs.jsp
=
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://www.lubega.com FOR DETAILS=
=
Buildfile: build.xml
init:
[echo] build.compiler = classic
[echo]
=
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://www.lubega.com FOR DETAILS=
=
Buildfile: build.xml
init:
error:
[echo] jboss.home = ../jboss/dist is not a
=
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://www.lubega.com FOR DETAILS=
=
Buildfile: build.xml
init:
error:
[echo] jboss.home = ../jboss/dist is not a
=
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://www.lubega.com FOR DETAILS=
=
Buildfile: build.xml
init:
[echo] build.compiler = ${build.compiler}
=
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://www.lubega.com FOR DETAILS=
=
___
Jboss-development mailing list
1 - 100 of 112 matches
Mail list logo
