We have a war archive that includes a netbeans-generated context.xml for tomcat
deployment.
If we drop this war into webapps, the context root remains that of the war
filename.
Has there been a regression in recent 7.x releases in this regard?
Interestingly, a colleague confirms that this is
2013/3/3 James Green james.mk.gr...@gmail.com:
We have a war archive that includes a netbeans-generated context.xml for
tomcat deployment.
If we drop this war into webapps, the context root remains that of the war
filename.
As expected, in any of 7.0., 6.0 and even 5.5 .
Have you read the
On 3 March 2013 11:34, Konstantin Kolinko knst.koli...@gmail.com wrote:
2013/3/3 James Green james.mk.gr...@gmail.com:
We have a war archive that includes a netbeans-generated context.xml for
tomcat deployment.
If we drop this war into webapps, the context root remains that of the
war
On 03/03/2013 14:24, James Green wrote:
On 3 March 2013 11:34, Konstantin Kolinko knst.koli...@gmail.com wrote:
2013/3/3 James Green james.mk.gr...@gmail.com:
We have a war archive that includes a netbeans-generated context.xml for
tomcat deployment.
If we drop this war into webapps, the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
André,
On 2/27/13 3:59 AM, André Warnier wrote:
If I understand the original post correctly, the whole point would
be to know, at the httpd level, which worker (Tomcat) actually
processed this request, right ? If so, why not have the desired
On 3 March 2013 14:32, Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org wrote:
On 03/03/2013 14:24, James Green wrote:
On 3 March 2013 11:34, Konstantin Kolinko knst.koli...@gmail.com
wrote:
2013/3/3 James Green james.mk.gr...@gmail.com:
So now I have a war deployed. Easy enough. Now to set the URL path.
On 03/03/2013 15:29, James Green wrote:
On 3 March 2013 14:32, Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org wrote:
On 03/03/2013 14:24, James Green wrote:
On 3 March 2013 11:34, Konstantin Kolinko knst.koli...@gmail.com
wrote:
2013/3/3 James Green james.mk.gr...@gmail.com:
So now I have a war deployed.
On 3 March 2013 15:51, Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org wrote:
On 03/03/2013 15:29, James Green wrote:
On 3 March 2013 14:32, Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org wrote:
On 03/03/2013 14:24, James Green wrote:
On 3 March 2013 11:34, Konstantin Kolinko knst.koli...@gmail.com
wrote:
2013/3/3
On 3/3/2013 8:22 AM, James Green wrote:
On 3 March 2013 15:51, Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org wrote:
On 03/03/2013 15:29, James Green wrote:
On 3 March 2013 14:32, Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org wrote:
On 03/03/2013 14:24, James Green wrote:
On 3 March 2013 11:34, Konstantin Kolinko
On 03/03/2013 16:22, James Green wrote:
On 3 March 2013 15:51, Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org wrote:
snip/
The base file name controls the context path. If you want to change the
context path, the simplest solution is to change the base file name.
Fine. But this is not as described on this
On 3 March 2013 17:58, Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org wrote:
On 03/03/2013 16:22, James Green wrote:
On 3 March 2013 15:51, Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org wrote:
snip/
The base file name controls the context path. If you want to change the
context path, the simplest solution is to change
On 03/03/2013 19:25, James Green wrote:
On 3 March 2013 17:58, Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org wrote:
On 03/03/2013 16:22, James Green wrote:
On 3 March 2013 15:51, Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org wrote:
snip/
The base file name controls the context path. If you want to change the
context
On 3 March 2013 19:44, Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org wrote:
On 03/03/2013 19:25, James Green wrote:
I am clearly inferring too much. An explicit statement would certainly
help
reduce confusion, and perhaps cause the Netbeans people to avoid putting
the path attribute into the context
On 02.03.2013 15:52, Christopher Schultz wrote:
All,
Motivated by seeing Rainer's presentation at ApacheCon 2013,
Monitoring Apache Tomcat and the Apache Web [1], I started looking
at mod_jk's status worker - particularly the XML output as I believe
it will be the easiest format to parse
On 03.03.2013 15:44, Christopher Schultz wrote:
André,
On 2/27/13 3:59 AM, André Warnier wrote:
If I understand the original post correctly, the whole point would
be to know, at the httpd level, which worker (Tomcat) actually
processed this request, right ? If so, why not have the desired
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Giuseppe Sacco
giuse...@eppesuigoccas.homedns.org wrote:
[...]
I listed all providers here:
http://centrum.lixper.it/~giuseppe/ipad-tomcat-list-ciphers-no-bouncycastle.html
as you may see, a few of them are TLS_RSA and TLS_DHE:
*
16 matches
Mail list logo
