And fwiw, the proxy-impl-1.0.3-SNAPSHOT does seem to work well on karaf 2.3.x for me. So unless you can actually point to the problem, I would avoid removing that requirement.
2014-06-25 15:52 GMT+02:00 Christian Schneider <ch...@die-schneider.net>: > As far as I can see we already define the capabiltiy in > etc/config.properties but it does not seem to work. > > In a plain karaf 3.0.0 I can call "capabilities 0" and get no osgi.ee > capability. If I remove the > lines that define the org.osgi.framework.system.capabilities= \ in > config.properties then the capability is there. > > So I think we have some error in this definition. > > In any case as it does not seem to work out of the box I propose we try to > find a way to omit the requirement in the aries bundles for now. > So we have more time to fix this in a new release. Does anyone know how > this can be configured in the maven bundle plugin? > > Christian > > > On 25.06.2014 15:25, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > >> We have to add in the etc/config.properties. It's where we define the >> system package and version. >> >> Regards >> JB >> >> On 06/25/2014 03:12 PM, Christian Schneider wrote: >> >>> How is this done? Can it be done on an existing karaf version using just >>> configuration or do we need a new release? >>> >>> Christian >>> >>> >>> On 25.06.2014 15:03, Achim Nierbeck wrote: >>> >>>> We should add this requirement to the container as provided, since this >>>> will affect a lot of people using the maven-bundle-plugin 2.5 >>>> >>>> Regards, Achim >>>> >>>> sent from mobile device >>>> Am 25.06.2014 14:55 schrieb "Christian Schneider" >>>> <ch...@die-schneider.net>: >>>> >>>> In our current build we seem to use the maven bundle plugin >>>>> 2.4.1-SNAPSHOT. >>>>> Since this version was changed I see a new Manifest header: >>>>> Require-Capability: osgi.ee; filter="(&(osgi.ee=JavaSE)(version=1.6))" >>>>> >>>>> When I try to install such a bundle into karaf 2.3.5 (I tried with jpa >>>>> container 1.0.1-SNAPSHOT). I get the error that this requirement is >>>>> not met. >>>>> >>>>> So the question is should we avoid this header or should we add the >>>>> capability to the container in some way? >>>>> >>>>> Christian >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Christian Schneider >>>>> http://www.liquid-reality.de >>>>> >>>>> Open Source Architect >>>>> http://www.talend.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >> > > -- > Christian Schneider > http://www.liquid-reality.de > > Open Source Architect > http://www.talend.com > >
