Tom integrating karaf development and bndtools development has been tricky
but it is getting better. Karaf development is centered around Mavens
build process while bndtools is centered around a custom workspace in cnf.
This release bndtools will be supporting maven and you can see the latest
post here https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/bndtools-users/VcQ2rsb--Pk
You can see how to include karaf features in a bndrun file in Christians
examples here https://github.com/cschneider/osgi-chat and the new cxf
example. What I do in my build is I include a features.bnd file where I
map karaf features to bndrun runrequires/runbundles statements and I
include that in my bndrun files. I have to separately maintain my
features.bnd and my features.xml. I do this so I can build both a single
jar deployable and run in karaf and pax-exam. Although the mixing of the
two build processes is hard it is becoming easier by the day.
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 7:45 AM, <t...@quarendon.net> wrote:
> I'm really struggling to get my bundles installed in Karaf, so I'd
> some hints on how to diagnose some issues. I'm trying to do a
> feature:install of
> a features.xml file I've written to install my bundles.
> My latest is:
> missing requirement osgi.wiring.package;
> [caused by: Unable to resolve osgi.enroute.base.api (R 62.0): missing
> requirement [osgi.enroute.base.api (R 62.0)] osgi.unresolvable;
> My interpretation of this is that I've got conflicting versions of
> something. I
> have no idea what, nor to figure out what the cause is.
> Up to now I've always just been using bndtools in eclipse (and the bundles
> installing all work fine there), my first experience of Karaf was
> yesterday, so
> beyond what I've read in the docs, I know nothing about what useful
> there might be to help me diagnose. I don't even know how I would list
> what I've
> currently got installed that might satisfy osgi.enroute.dto.api or
> Any hints would be much appreciated.
> This seems to be extraordinarily more complicated that "resolve" in
> bndtools, or
> am I being naive?