Absolutely, especially when Yoko is going to be used by Geronimo to
remove it's dependency on the RI :)
geir
On Dec 22, 2006, at 12:34 PM, Mikhail Markov wrote:
I think we should file it as JIRA in Yoko. Relying on private(!)
field (even
if this field exist only in Harmony :-)) looks inapproprite to me.
Regards,
Mikhail
On 12/22/06, Zakharov, Vasily M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi, all,
I was checking the output from HARMONY-2615
<http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-2615> stress test, and
found a couple of issues with Yoko.
org.apache.yoko.rmi.util.ClassLoaderLocal class contains the
following
line in its static initializer:
classes_vector = ClassLoader.class.getDeclaredField
("classes");
This line references the classes field in class
java.lang.ClassLoader,
and that field is not documented by RI API JavaDoc and so is
absent in
Harmony classlib.
As the result of this issue, the classes
org.apache.yoko.rmi.util.ClassLoaderLocal and
org.apache.yoko.rmi.impl.PortableRemoteObjectExtImpl fail to load
with
NoSuchFieldException.
I'm not sure what should be done to this issue.
Should we file it to Yoko JIRA as "strong bond to RI"?
Or should we add the field mentioned to Harmony classlib? :)
Vasily Zakharov
Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division
