> Any jars in the lib directory are automatically added to the
> application classpath.
>
> > I'm asking because
> > I'm getting this error in tomcat.log:
> >
> > Context log: path="" Class Not Found in init
> > java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: Turbine at
> org.apache.tomcat.loader.AdaptiveClassLoader.loadClass(Adaptiv
> eClassLoader.java:
> 450)
> >
> Are you sure the Turbine class is actually in
> turbine-2.0.jar. What does 'jar tf turbine-2.0.jar' show you?
It says:
META-INF/
META-INF/MANIFEST.MF
org/
org/apache/
org/apache/java/
org/apache/java/lang/
org/apache/java/security/
org/apache/java/util/
...
org/apache/turbine/util/webmacro/WebMacroNavigation.class
org/apache/turbine/util/webmacro/WebMacroPageAttributes.class
org/apache/turbine/util/webmacro/WebMacroSecurityCheck.class
Turbine.class
Another question: how does Tomcat know to look for a servlet
in TOMCAT_HOME/webapps/turbine? I'm asking because the web.xml
file defining the Turbine servlet is located in
TOMCAT_HOME/webapps/turbine/WEB-INF/web.xml; does Tomcat append
all such web.xml files to create its internal list of known
servlets?
What would be the proper URL to access Turbine from the browser?
For now, I'm using http://localhost:8080/servlet/Turbine; is
this correct?
> > What about "other" jar files, such as the MySQL JDBC driver?
> > Should I:
> > * Add that to Tomcat's classpath in tomcat.bat?
> > * Copy it to TOMCAT_HOME/webapps/turbine/WEB-INF/lib?
> Both of these methods currently work in the same manner.
> However, in the future
> it appears that Tomcat will become more discriminating about
> system classpath
> vs. tomcat classpath vs. application classpath. Therefore,
> the _proper_
> technique is to copy them to the application's lib directory (e.g,
> TOMCAT_HOME/webapps/turbine/WEB-INF/lib).
Ok; this implies that if I have several apps using MySQL via JDBC,
I would have to copy the JDBC jar file to each of their WEB-INF/lib
directories, right?
> > If this mail is in HTML format, blame Exchange Server: Q222508
> It's okay to blame Exchange server, but I gotta say that the
> HTML email is _really_ annoying to deal with when trying to reply
> in plain text.
Yes, I totally agree.
PLEASE, TURBINE LIST MEMBERS, ACCEPT MY APOLOGIES FOR THE
BIG PAIN IN THE REAR CAUSED BY MY HTML-FORMATTED MESSAGES.
(Sorry for shouting).
> Do you think
> maybe you could use a Hotmail or Yahoo! account to post to
> the list? (FYI:
> Yahoo! now provides POP3 access to your mail account.)
Would you believe it if I told you that the same bone-headed
sysadmins who refuse to patch Exchange server are also refusing
to open any "dangerous" ports through the proxy (which is, of
course, M$ proxy)? And tomorrow is "Sysadmin Day"... I'll have
to think of a nice, smelly present for these bastards!
> Christopher Elkins
Thanks,
--
Gonzalo A. Diethelm
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
If this mail is in HTML format, blame Exchange Server: Q222508
