The simple answer is no. You can have bundle-level dependencies (generally considered bad form though), but you can't specify a dependency on a bundle's state as far as I know, since the bundle dependencies are used for resolution only, not without using a listener as you say, anyway.
The question I have is what requires you to have bundle dependencies like this? If you are waiting for services to be registered look at using a component (e.g. Declarative Services) which will be injected with the services it depends on and then activated when all dependencies are satisfied. If you have some magic happening in your activator which another bundle depends on then this is a prime candidate for declarative services. Cheers, Chris On 14 April 2010 10:49, Mahammad Nasir <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi > > I have a situation. > > 2 Threads are trying to install, start bundles. Thread 1 trying to install > and start bundle A. Thread 2 is trying to install and start Bundle B. > Thread 2 always starts after Bundle A.start() called. (Before start > returns). Bundle B is dependent on Bundle A. and it requires Bundle A in > active state. > > I want to know, is there any way i can ensure that, Bundle B will start > only > after A is started?I mean can i specify this contraint? > > I know i can have a listner and wait for the status of the Bunlde A and > then > start B. But for some reason this isnt good solution for my problem domain. > > Pls help me. > > > >
