Call your servlet from a form action="servlet/packagename.servletname" NOT
servlets/packagename.servletname unless you specifically defined any
additional servlet mappings in your server.xml under the conf directory
(http://<webbroot>/<weppapplication>/servlet is the default invoker). If
your servlet is not in a package, then call it with servlet/servletname...

/Helena


-----Original Message-----
From: Charles Webber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 21:31
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Gotta Be Something Simple


Just a quick question - how do I map them in a deployment descriptor?
Where can I find either a HOW-TO, or some additional documentation?
Thanks.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Barre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 12:49 PM
Subject: Re: Gotta Be Something Simple


> the default location for servlets should be /WEB-INF/classes/ within the
apps folder. Have
> you tried this? Also have you added and mapped them in your deployment
descriptor?
>
> Matt
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Charles Webber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 12:26 PM
> Subject: Gotta Be Something Simple
>
>
> > Got a problem that I either don't understand, or something isn't
configured
> > properly.
> > I have a couple of servlets that after I corrected the CLASSPATH,
compiled
> > without any problems.  However, the page that attempts to invoke the
> > servlets returns a 404 (not found).  I've tried putting the servlets in
> > various directories under my tomcat directory tree, but still same
result.
> > Both servlets are part of the same package.  The page that tries to
invoke
> > the main servlet uses a form action="servlets/servletname".
> > This is my first attempt in writing something like this, and even though
I
> > think I understand where things are supposed to go and why they are
supposed
> > to go there, I am baffled at why the servlet can't be found.  Any help
would
> > be appreciated.
> > Thanks.
>

Reply via email to