Ah! You have org.osgi.service.cm in org.apache.felix.configadmin-1.0.5-SNAPSHOT.jar !
Added that and I get the telnet 6666 and a telnet client opens! On 9/2/08, Roger Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > org.osgi.service.log obr search yields org.knopflerfish.log implementation > > http://www.osgi.org/Repository/HomePage?cmd=browse&keywords=org.osgi.service.log&submit=search > > When I run a Felix profile with the org.knopflerfish.log > log_all-2.0.0.jar config'ed in, org.knopflerfish.log then has > dependency on org.osgi.service.cm > > org.osgi.service.cm obr search yields 0. > > http://www.osgi.org/Repository/HomePage?cmd=browse&keywords=org.osgi.service.cm&submit=search > > > //If it weren't for property tax...I'd retire to gardening and high > magnification stereoscopy hobbies:-) > > On 9/2/08, Richard S. Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> It looks like it uses log in ServiceMediator; however, it should >> probably be modified to import LogService dynamically in the future to >> avoid a hard dependency or package the log packages internally. >> >> -> richard >> >> Roger Martin wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> It depends on org.osgi.service.log? I'm looking where this may be... >>> >>> >>> --------- >>> Enter profile name: profile4 >>> >>> DEBUG: WIRE: 1.0 -> org.ungoverned.osgi.service.shell -> 1.0 >>> DEBUG: WIRE: 1.0 -> org.osgi.service.startlevel -> 0 >>> DEBUG: WIRE: 1.0 -> org.apache.felix.shell -> 1.0 >>> DEBUG: WIRE: 1.0 -> org.osgi.framework -> 0 >>> DEBUG: WIRE: 1.0 -> org.osgi.service.packageadmin -> 0 >>> ERROR: Error starting >>> file:bundle/org.apache.felix.shell.remote-1.0.1-SNAPSHOT.j >>> ar (org.osgi.framework.BundleException: Unresolved constraint in bundle >>> 2: >>> packa >>> ge; (&(package=org.osgi.service.log)(version>=1.3.0))) >>> org.osgi.framework.BundleException: Unresolved constraint in bundle 2: >>> package; >>> (&(package=org.osgi.service.log)(version>=1.3.0)) >>> at >>> org.apache.felix.framework.Felix._resolveBundle(Felix.java:1747) >>> at org.apache.felix.framework.Felix._startBundle(Felix.java:1610) >>> at org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.startBundle(Felix.java:1563) >>> at >>> org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.setFrameworkStartLevel(Felix.java:11 >>> 35) >>> at >>> org.apache.felix.framework.StartLevelImpl.run(StartLevelImpl.java:267 >>> ) >>> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:619) >>> DEBUG: WIRE: 3.0 -> org.osgi.framework -> 0 >>> DEBUG: WIRE: 3.0 -> org.osgi.service.obr -> 3.0 >>> DEBUG: WIRE: 3.0 -> org.apache.felix.shell -> 1.0 >>> >>> On 8/30/08, Felix Meschberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Karl Pauls schrieb: >>>> >>>>> On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Richard S. Hall >>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Felix Meschberger wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> To also record the original authorship of the code is just another >>>>>>> such >>>>>>> reference case. But I see your point about confusion (I don't think >>>>>>> it >>>>>>> is a >>>>>>> big issue, though). So what do you think of the following extension: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Contains code originally developed and contributed to the >>>>>>> Apache Felix project by Dieter Wimberger >>>>>>> >>>>>> Well, I would still not be in favor of this, since it is does not >>>>>> follow >>>>>> past precedent in Felix. We specifically started a contributor page >>>>>> for >>>>>> this >>>>>> very reason. >>>>>> >>>>> I agree, the above statement would set a bad precedent and make us >>>>> end-up with a lot of this kind extensions that are not really needed. >>>>> The contributor page seems to be the place to note this kind of things >>>>> to me. >>>>> >>>> Ok, I removed the attribution. The contribution is still noted on our >>>> contributions page [1]. >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> Felix >>>> >>>> [1] http://felix.apache.org/site/felix-r4-contributions.html >>>> >>>> >> >
