Features in Karaf / Pax Exam

2010-11-05 Thread Andreas Gies
Hello, I am sorry if am hitting the wrong list with my question, but it seemed a good starting point for me ... We have started the development of a karaf based application and wnat to exploit the features support for packaging. In my features I have the following: features feature

Re: How about to to facilitate to use JNDI(boot delegation) in karaf?

2010-11-05 Thread Guillaume Nodet
The boot delegation property can be modified in etc/config.properties or overriden in etc/custom.properties. Can you give a bit more detail on how to use JNDI ? I'm not sure to understand why the package is used but not directly referenced. On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 10:35, ext2 x...@tongtech.com

Re: Features in Karaf / Pax Exam

2010-11-05 Thread Guillaume Nodet
I think pax-exam has its own features parser, so it may have been kept behing what karaf provides. We really need to use a schema and version that to be able to detect such problems more easily. On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 10:17, Andreas Gies andr...@wayofquality.de wrote: Hello, I am sorry if am

Delay a Start-level?

2010-11-05 Thread Kit Plummer
I'm currently using Karaf Features (very cool feature) to deploy a suite of bundles. My feature depends on activemq-blueprint - and subsequently there are services that require the broker to be running to get through their startup methods. When I start Karaf (everytime) I get a nasty

Re: Change ka...@root prompt?

2010-11-05 Thread Guillaume Nodet
The default PROMPT is defined as: public static final String DEFAULT_PROMPT = \u001b[1m${user}\u001b...@${application} ; To change this, you can set the PROMPT variable in etc/shell.init.script to something that suit your needs better. Either as a plain variable:

Re: Change ka...@root prompt?

2010-11-05 Thread Guillaume Nodet
You're right. The correct value for karaf 2.1.0 would be: PROMPT= '\u001b\\[1m${user}\u001b\\...@${application} '; Though the value I provided will work on 2.2.0 (trunk for now). On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 21:15, Mike Van mvangeert...@comcast.net wrote: Guillaume, Are you sure that's