On Jun 12, 2006, at 11:12 PM, D. Strauss wrote:
Hello, Matt
how did you and the others got RC1 working??????
I tried the windows version, I tried the linux version now: all crash
with the same exception:
<big snip>
Checking the source code of
org.apache.geronimo.security.keystore.FileKeystoreManager of rc1
reveals
an interesting (and very funny) line:
loader.loadClass("[Ljavax.net.ssl.KeyManager;");
This is how you load the class of javax.net.ssl.KeyManager[] (note
the array).
I have no idea either why this code construction is required or why
you are having trouble with it. What jvm are you using?
Is this the new way on loading classes? I mean the [L construct is
unknown. I also checked the Sun API docs and they were very clear:
loader.loadClass("javax.net.ssl.KeyManager");
is the right way. Or did I miss something about the new specs?
That will load the class of javax.net.ssl.KeyManager, but not the
array class.
tthanks
david jencks
Anyway, it's good to hear that everyone got RC1 working. Seems I
have to
stay with 1.0 for a long time ;-)
Best regards
Dirk
Matt Hogstrom schrieb:
Over the past few days the outstanding issues that were raised
about the
first candidate have been addressed.
They were that we were missing the LICENSE.txt as well as Notices
from
the distribution. I added them. Guillaume also pointed out that he
noted that there should be a Third Party Notices. This was not
included
in the original 1.0 or previous distributions so I did not follow it
up. Thoughts?
Also, the 1.0 release notes were removed and updated the thread
started
by Hernan. The Wiki has been updated and the wiki was the source
used
to create the RELEASE-NOTES-1.1.txt file you will find in the build.
To avoid issues with the version number and the plugins I used rc1
which
Aaron had added in the plugins for supported versions so I trust that
works here.
JSisson addressed the problem with not being able to run Geronimo
under
CygWin and Kevan worked with Aaron to address a new deployment
problem
that left partially deployed artifacts in the repository.
I have taken this build and run some performance tests on it and
we are
significantly better in 1.1 than we were in 1.0. We have a lot of
improvement left for CMP EJBs. It appears that the performance
improvements in the EJB tier has changed a race condition when
running
under DB2. I'm afraid that the only way to address the problem is to
add a new feature to TranQL and OEJB that allow for the
specification of
Isolation Levels for individual beans. This is a relatively simple
change but the build as it stands is specification compliant. I
would
prefer to let this release go forward since CMP 2.1 EJBs are not
nearly
as common as the other J2EE components. I would like to address
this in
1.1.1 however I don't think we've locked down whether that would be
allowed or not. The change would affect TranQL and OpenEJB so
they are
really included components so I'd be interested in people's feedback.
So please accept a named RC1. Your voting and feedback are for:
Geronimo 1.1
DayTrader 1.1
Specs 1.1
The vote will stand for 72 hours. Issues raised will be discussed
and
if we conclude that there is a bug that must be addressed then we
will
mitigate the problem and respin a new rc for a 72 hour vote.
If this is accepted all three of the above components will be
released
simultaneously.
Here are the builds for your review and comment:
http://people.apache.org/~hogstrom/rc1/geronimo-jetty-j2ee-1.1-
rc1.tar.gz
http://people.apache.org/~hogstrom/rc1/geronimo-jetty-j2ee-1.1-
rc1.zip
http://people.apache.org/~hogstrom/rc1/geronimo-tomcat-j2ee-1.1-
rc1.tar.gz
http://people.apache.org/~hogstrom/rc1/geronimo-romcat-j2ee-1.1-
rc1.zip
http://people.apache.org/~hogstrom/rc1/geronimo-jetty-minimal-1.1-
rc1.tar.gz
http://people.apache.org/~hogstrom/rc1/geronimo-jetty-minimal-1.1-
rc1.zip
http://people.apache.org/~hogstrom/rc1/geronimo-tomcat-minimal-1.1-
rc1.tar.gz
http://people.apache.org/~hogstrom/rc1/geronimo-tomcat-minimal-1.1-
rc1.zip
http://people.apache.org/~hogstrom/rc1/daytrader-ear-1.1-rc1.zip
Looking forward to your comments and feedback.
