Looks like it is a bug under pax-exam 2.4, by forcing my maven build
to pickup pax-exam 2.6 via dependencyManagement fixes the issue.

My guess karaf 2.3.1-SNAPSHOT also seeing the same issue, so upgrading
to pax-exam 1.6 would fix it as well

-Dan


On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 7:13 PM, Dan Tran <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi
>
> My pax-exam test started to fail with the following trace
>
> java.lang.Exception: Could not start bundle
> mvn:org.ops4j.pax.swissbox/pax-swissbox-core/ in feature(s)
> exam-2.4.0: Unresolved constraint in bundle
> org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.core [68]: Unable to resolve
> 68.0: missing requirement [68.0] osgi.wiring.package;
> (&(osgi.wiring.package=org.ops4j.lang)(version>=1.4.0))
>         at 
> org.apache.karaf.features.internal.FeaturesServiceImpl.installFeatures(FeaturesServiceImpl.java:476)[20:org.apache.karaf.features.core:2.3.0]
>         at 
> org.apache.karaf.features.internal.FeaturesServiceImpl$2.run(FeaturesServiceImpl.java:1141)[20:org.apache.karaf.features.core:2.3.0]
> Caused by: org.osgi.framework.BundleException: Unresolved constraint
> in bundle org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.core [68]: Unable to resolve 68.0:
> missing requirement [68.0] osgi.wiring.package; (&(osgi.wiring.
> package=org.ops4j.lang)(version>=1.4.0))
>         at 
> org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.resolveBundleRevision(Felix.java:3826)[org.apache.felix.framework-4.0.3.jar:]
>         at 
> org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.startBundle(Felix.java:1868)[org.apache.felix.framework-4.0.3.jar:]
>         at 
> org.apache.felix.framework.BundleImpl.start(BundleImpl.java:944)[org.apache.felix.framework-4.0.3.jar:]
>         at 
> org.apache.felix.framework.BundleImpl.start(BundleImpl.java:931)[org.apache.felix.framework-4.0.3.jar:]
>         at 
> org.apache.karaf.features.internal.FeaturesServiceImpl.installFeatures(FeaturesServiceImpl.java:473)[20:org.apache.karaf.features.core:2.3.0]
>         ... 1 more
>
>
> Further investigation points to a generated feature file under my exam
> directory with this name examfeatures.xml
>
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <features name="pax-exam-features-2.4.0">
> <feature name="exam" version="2.4.0">
>
> <bundle start-level='5'>mvn:org.ops4j.base/ops4j-base-lang/1.3.0</bundle>
> <bundle start-level='5'>mvn:org.ops4j.base/ops4j-base-monitors/1.3.0</bundle>
> <bundle start-level='5'>mvn:org.ops4j.base/ops4j-base-net/1.3.0</bundle>
> <bundle start-level='5'>mvn:org.ops4j.base/ops4j-base-store/1.3.0</bundle>
> <bundle start-level='5'>mvn:org.ops4j.base/ops4j-base-io/1.3.0</bundle>
> <bundle start-level='5'>mvn:org.ops4j.base/ops4j-base-spi/1.3.0</bundle>
> <bundle 
> start-level='5'>mvn:org.ops4j.base/ops4j-base-util-property/1.3.0</bundle>
> <bundle start-level='5'>mvn:org.ops4j.pax.swissbox/pax-swissbox-core/</bundle>
> <bundle 
> start-level='5'>mvn:org.ops4j.pax.swissbox/pax-swissbox-extender/</bundle>
> <bundle 
> start-level='5'>mvn:org.ops4j.pax.swissbox/pax-swissbox-lifecycle/</bundle>
> <bundle 
> start-level='5'>mvn:org.ops4j.pax.swissbox/pax-swissbox-framework/</bundle>
> <bundle start-level='5'>mvn:org.ops4j.pax.exam/pax-exam/2.4.0</bundle>
> <bundle 
> start-level='5'>mvn:org.ops4j.pax.exam/pax-exam-extender-service/2.4.0</bundle>
> <bundle 
> start-level='5'>mvn:org.ops4j.pax.exam/pax-exam-container-rbc/2.4.0</bundle>
> <bundle start-level='5'>wrap:mvn:junit/junit/4.10</bundle>
> <bundle 
> start-level='5'>mvn:org.ops4j.pax.exam/pax-exam-invoker-junit/2.4.0</bundle>
> <bundle 
> start-level='5'>mvn:org.apache.karaf.tooling.exam/org.apache.karaf.tooling.exam.options/2.3.0</bundle>
> <bundle 
> start-level='5'>mvn:org.apache.geronimo.specs/geronimo-atinject_1.0_spec/1.0</bundle>
> <bundle start-level='5'>mvn:org.ops4j.pax.exam/pax-exam-inject/2.4.0</bundle>
> </feature>
> </features>
>
>
> Where pax-swissbox-xxx bundles do not have associated version, by
> default it would pickup the latest version 1.6 ( release on
> 12/26/2012), instead of 1.5.1 and cause the failure
>
> How do I fix this?  Adding those artifact into my test dependencies
> does not work either
>
> Thanks
>
> -Dan

Reply via email to