Dan,

I didn't realise 2.1 provides XMLBeans support. I added some classes
to provide JAX-RS frontend providers (which thinking about it is
probbably not what Piotr is looking for), does this mean I can now get
that functionailty out of the box from 2.1?

Brad.

On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 3:04 AM, Daniel Kulp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Kind of  a crazy idea....   can you try 2.0.4?    2.0.4 had a "bug" in the
> that it always dumped out full stack traces for all the exceptions being
> thrown out of the services.   It might help.
>
> That said, with 2.1/2.0.6, if you can figure out how to turn on FINE level
> logging for the java.util.logging stuff, you should be able to get the stack
> traces there as well.   Probably need a logging.properties file and then set
> the appropriate system property as a jvm arg.
>
> Dan
>
>
>
>
> On May 18, 2008, at 5:24 AM, Piotr Skawinski wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm facing more and compatibility errors with cxf after upgrading to
>> version 2.1. The latest one is compatibility with the XMLBeans. When parsing
>> xml using XMLBeans I get following error:
>>
>> 2008-05-18 11:10:58 org.apache.cxf.phase.PhaseInterceptorChain doIntercept
>> INFO: Application has thrown exception, unwinding now:
>> java.lang.ExceptionInInitializerError: null
>>
>> Even if I have a general exception catch block the error is not catched
>> and only the above pure trace is logged. The code runs fine when it is
>> outside any servlet container.
>>
>> Is cxf really not compatible with XMLBeans?? I use 2.3.0 version of
>> XMLBeans and that is also that version that cxf 2.1 says it is using.
>>
>> The same error occurs with the previous version of the cxf, for example
>> 2.0.5.
>>
>> Any suggestion ??
>>
>> Any help will be appreciated.
>>
>> -Piotr
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Connect to the next generation of MSN Messenger
>>
>> http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=wlmailtagline
>
> ---
> Daniel Kulp
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.dankulp.com/blog
>
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to