DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40050] - context XML file deleted when path is not readable
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40050. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40050 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 05:17 --- Agreed this is bad behavior. Oddly enough, I can't seem to find that error message in the current code. So the code must have changed. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40050] - context XML file deleted when path is not readable
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40050. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40050 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEEDINFO --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 05:20 --- Do you have the anti(Resource|JAR)Locking flag enabled? I see a place in org.apache.catalina.startup.ContextConfig#antiLocking (line 964 in current SVN version of code) that deletes the docBase file. These two flags are false by default, so you probably don't have them enabled, but I still wanted to ask. (See http://tomcat.apache.org/tomcat-5.5-doc/config/context.html for the configuration explanation of these two flags). Also, if you wouldn't mind testing on v5.5.20, the latest stable release, that'd be awesome. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40150] - Incorrect User/Role classnames are silently ignored.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40150. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40150 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 05:24 --- This looks like a good idea to enhance. However, please submit your patch in diff format rather than the whole file, that would make its review and application much faster: http://www.apache.org/dev/contributors.html#patches provides more details. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41244] New: - webservice :no response using connector AJP with tomcat =5.5.10
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41244. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41244 Summary: webservice :no response using connector AJP with tomcat =5.5.10 Product: Tomcat 5 Version: 5.5.10 Platform: Other OS/Version: other Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Connector:AJP AssignedTo: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hello, I am using webservice (made by commons-httpclient3.0rc3) with an apache-httpd link to tomcat with AJP1.3 connector. When I send the request directly to tomcat, there is no problem whereas when I send it to apache-httpd, there is no answer receive by the client. I can reproduce this problem with a tomcat on linux or on windows. I have tried various versions of tomcat and finally I have this result : I have no response with tomcat =5.5.10 but if I use an older (=5.5.9) there is no problem and my client get a response. So I think that the modification made into the connector have made a regression. more precisely, I have tried various request for my webservice (POST message) : If I use HTTP1.0, there is no problem. If I use HTTP1.1 whith a content-lenght, there is no problem, but if I used HTTP1.1 with a chunk mode transfert, there is no response. With tomcat launch by eclipse, I can see that the authentification is made (an authentification is requiered for the use of my webservice), but nothing is done after. Moreover, in the log of mod_jk, I have this information : Fri Dec 22 11:22:22 2006] [29700:1728] [debug] ajp_send_request::jk_ajp_common.c (1261): request body to send 0 - request body to resend 0. Here is my request : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# /tmp/ngrep -W byline port 80 interface: eth0 (172.26.224.0/255.255.248.0) filter: (ip) and ( port 80 ) T 10.67.188.74:4806 - 172.26.227.231:80 [AP] POST /pac-server/services/contact HTTP/1.1. Content-Type: text/xml; charset=utf-8. SOAPAction: . Authorization: Basic cGVyZjA6cGVyZjA=. User-Agent: Jakarta Commons-HttpClient/3.0-rc3. Host: paplx2. Transfer-Encoding: chunked. . 46b. ?xml version=1.0 encoding=UTF-8?soapenv:Envelope xmlns:soapenv=http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/; xmlns:xsd=http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema; xmlns:xsi=http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema- instancesoapenv:Bodyns1:changementTarif soapenv:encodingStyle=http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/; xmlns:ns1=urn:francetelecom.com/pacin0 href=#id0/in1 href=#id1//ns1:changementTarifmultiRef id=id0 soapenc:root=0 soapenv:encodingStyle=http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/; xsi:type=ns2:ReferenceAppel xmlns:soapenc=http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/; xmlns:ns2=http://domain.business.server.pac.capgemini.com;idBepPcs xsi:type=xsd:string1/idBepPcsidentifiantAppel xsi:type=xsd:string23456/identifiantAppel/multiRefmultiRef id=id1 soapenc:root=0 soapenv:encodingStyle=http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/; xsi:type=ns3:PalierTarifaire xmlns:ns3=http://domain.business.server.pac.capgemini.com; xmlns:soapenc=http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/;codeTarifaire xsi:type=xsd:string085/codeTarifaire/multiRef/soapenv:Body/soapenv:En velope. 0. . #exit 7 received, 0 dropped [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# The log with the 1.2.19 mod_jk : [Fri Dec 22 11:22:19 2006] [29696:1728] [debug] do_shm_open::jk_shm.c (295): Truncated shared memory to 24704 [Fri Dec 22 11:22:19 2006] [29696:1728] [debug] do_shm_open::jk_shm.c (327): Initialized shared memory size=24704 free=24576 addr=0xb7f39000 [Fri Dec 22 11:22:19 2006] [29696:1728] [debug] do_shm_open_lock::jk_shm.c (234): Opened shared memory lock /etc/httpd/logs/jk-runtime-status.lock [Fri Dec 22 11:22:19 2006] [29696:1728] [debug] init_jk::mod_jk.c (2444): Initialized shm:/etc/httpd/logs/jk-runtime-status [Fri Dec 22 11:22:19 2006] [29696:1728] [debug] uri_worker_map_open::jk_uri_worker_map.c (361): rule map size is 0 [Fri Dec 22 11:22:19 2006] [29696:1728] [debug] jk_map_resolve_references::jk_map.c (638): Checking for references with prefix worker. with wildcard (recursion 1) [Fri Dec 22 11:22:19 2006] [29696:1728] [debug] build_worker_map::jk_worker.c (236): creating worker 45hpac [Fri Dec 22 11:22:19 2006] [29696:1728] [debug] wc_create_worker::jk_worker.c (141): about to create instance 45hpac of ajp13 [Fri Dec 22 11:22:19 2006] [29696:1728] [debug] wc_create_worker::jk_worker.c (154): about to validate and init 45hpac [Fri Dec 22 11:22:19 2006] [29696:1728] [debug] ajp_validate::jk_ajp_common.c (1922): worker 45hpac contact is 'paplx2:9049' [Fri Dec 22 11:22:19 2006] [29696:1728] [debug] ajp_init::jk_ajp_common.c (2047): setting endpoint options: [Fri Dec 22 11:22:19
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40160] - Webdav Context path must be /*
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40160. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40160 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 06:22 --- Peter, thank you for posting the filter: I like it as a nice, clean solution to an unfortunate (but non-Tomcat) problem. Andrew, thank you for posting your suggestions: the second one is good and as you've noted, it's already been implemented. I hope Peter's filter works well for you. I'm going to link to it from the actual WebdavServlet class JavaDoc as well. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40162] - JNDI Environment is null within subthreads in Servlet.destroy()
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40162. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40162 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |NEEDINFO --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 06:23 --- Please attach your WAR to this issue: click the Create a New Attachment link above this comment field, below the Keywords field. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40177] - RequestDumperValve causes getCharacterEncoding to be called
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40177. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40177 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 06:40 --- I see that the Valve configuration reference already has a strong note to this effect. I added the same note to the Valve's JavaDoc header, and to server.xml. I've also marked the RequestDumperValve class as deprecated and told people to use the RequestDumperFilter instead. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40220] - Order of jar loading affects packaged resources
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40220. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40220 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 06:41 --- If you could upload a simple webapp that demonstrates this issue, that would be great. It would facilitate our reproduction of the issue and therefore its fix. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40222] - Default Tomcat configuration alows easy session hijacking
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40222. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40222 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |NEEDINFO --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 06:45 --- Are you sure the same session is indeed carried over? I thought we'd implemented the opposite (new session when moving from HTTP to HTTPS), quite purposefully for security, as far back as Tomcat 3.x. See for example http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/tomcat-users/200301.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41244] - webservice :no response using connector AJP with tomcat =5.5.10
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41244. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41244 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 07:05 --- I have search with google authentification 5.5.10 and I have find that there may be a problem between tomcat 5.5.10 and acegi security 0.8.2 http://www.jroller.com/page/agrebnev/20050909 I will try to upgrade acegi security in order to know if it is the problem. However is it normal that there is no log about tis problem ? where i can find some information about that ? -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 38360] - Domain for session cookies
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38360. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38360 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 07:09 --- Well, it's a feature. It's only a possible issue across sub-domains -- as specified in rfc 2109, the request-host and the Domain attribute must host match or the user-agent will reject the cookie. So, it's not a problem for a.example.com trying to read/write cookies for b.foo.com. However, if a.example.com and b.example.com were maintained by two different organizations, then maybe they wouldn't want to use this. Of course, the same thing for x.y.example.com and y.example.com. This is already possible for non-session cookies using javax.servlet.http.Cookie.setDomain(), and allowed/specified by rfc 2109. Resin, already support this behavior: http://www.caucho.com/resin-3.1/doc/session-tags.xtp#cookie-domain As implemented, this patch allows this config to be set in the Context / -- maybe there's a better place for it that would alleviate your security concerns? -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 38360] - Domain for session cookies
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38360. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38360 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 07:10 --- that should be domain-match, not host match Well, it's a feature. It's only a possible issue across sub-domains -- as specified in rfc 2109, the request-host and the Domain attribute must host match or the user-agent will reject the cookie. So, it's not a problem for -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
svn commit: r490308 - in /tomcat/jasper/branches/tc5.0.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper: ./ compiler/ runtime/ servlet/ xmlparser/
Author: yoavs
Date: Tue Dec 26 07:24:49 2006
New Revision: 490308
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=490308
Log:
Bugzilla 39975: don't have static Log references.
Modified:
tomcat/jasper/branches/tc5.0.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/EmbeddedServletOptions.java
tomcat/jasper/branches/tc5.0.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/JspC.java
tomcat/jasper/branches/tc5.0.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/compiler/Compiler.java
tomcat/jasper/branches/tc5.0.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/compiler/Generator.java
tomcat/jasper/branches/tc5.0.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/compiler/JspConfig.java
tomcat/jasper/branches/tc5.0.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/compiler/JspReader.java
tomcat/jasper/branches/tc5.0.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/compiler/JspRuntimeContext.java
tomcat/jasper/branches/tc5.0.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/compiler/TagLibraryInfoImpl.java
tomcat/jasper/branches/tc5.0.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/compiler/TldLocationsCache.java
tomcat/jasper/branches/tc5.0.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/runtime/JspFactoryImpl.java
tomcat/jasper/branches/tc5.0.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/runtime/PageContextImpl.java
tomcat/jasper/branches/tc5.0.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/runtime/PerThreadTagHandlerPool.java
tomcat/jasper/branches/tc5.0.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/servlet/JspServlet.java
tomcat/jasper/branches/tc5.0.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/servlet/JspServletWrapper.java
tomcat/jasper/branches/tc5.0.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/xmlparser/ParserUtils.java
Modified:
tomcat/jasper/branches/tc5.0.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/EmbeddedServletOptions.java
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomcat/jasper/branches/tc5.0.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/EmbeddedServletOptions.java?view=diffrev=490308r1=490307r2=490308
==
---
tomcat/jasper/branches/tc5.0.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/EmbeddedServletOptions.java
(original)
+++
tomcat/jasper/branches/tc5.0.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/EmbeddedServletOptions.java
Tue Dec 26 07:24:49 2006
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
/*
- * Copyright 1999,2004 The Apache Software Foundation.
+ * Copyright 1999,2004-2006 The Apache Software Foundation.
*
* Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the License);
* you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
@@ -37,10 +37,9 @@
* @author Hans Bergsten
* @author Pierre Delisle
*/
-public final class EmbeddedServletOptions implements Options {
-
-// Logger
-private static Log log = LogFactory.getLog(EmbeddedServletOptions.class);
+public class EmbeddedServletOptions implements Options {
+/** Logger (set by constructor. ) */
+private Log log;
private Properties settings = new Properties();
@@ -353,10 +352,11 @@
*/
public EmbeddedServletOptions(ServletConfig config,
ServletContext context) {
+log = LogFactory.getLog(getClass());
-Enumeration enum=config.getInitParameterNames();
-while( enum.hasMoreElements() ) {
-String k=(String)enum.nextElement();
+Enumeration enums=config.getInitParameterNames();
+while( enums.hasMoreElements() ) {
+String k=(String)enums.nextElement();
String v=config.getInitParameter( k );
setProperty( k, v);
}
Modified:
tomcat/jasper/branches/tc5.0.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/JspC.java
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomcat/jasper/branches/tc5.0.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/JspC.java?view=diffrev=490308r1=490307r2=490308
==
---
tomcat/jasper/branches/tc5.0.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/JspC.java
(original)
+++
tomcat/jasper/branches/tc5.0.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/JspC.java
Tue Dec 26 07:24:49 2006
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
/*
- * Copyright 1999,2004 The Apache Software Foundation.
+ * Copyright 1999,2004-2006 The Apache Software Foundation.
*
* Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the License);
* you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
@@ -88,8 +88,8 @@
public static final String DEFAULT_IE_CLASS_ID =
clsid:8AD9C840-044E-11D1-B3E9-00805F499D93;
-// Logger
-private static Log log = LogFactory.getLog(JspC.class);
+/** Logger (set by constructor. ) */
+private Log log;
private static final String SWITCH_VERBOSE = -v;
private static final String SWITCH_HELP = -help;
@@ -218,6 +218,11 @@
}
}
}
+}
+
+/** Constructor. */
+public JspC() {
+log = LogFactory.getLog(getClass());
}
public void setArgs(String[] arg) throws JasperException {
Modified:
svn commit: r490309 - /tomcat/container/branches/tc5.0.x/webapps/docs/changelog.xml
Author: yoavs Date: Tue Dec 26 07:24:54 2006 New Revision: 490309 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=490309 Log: Bugzilla 39975: don't have static Log references. Modified: tomcat/container/branches/tc5.0.x/webapps/docs/changelog.xml Modified: tomcat/container/branches/tc5.0.x/webapps/docs/changelog.xml URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomcat/container/branches/tc5.0.x/webapps/docs/changelog.xml?view=diffrev=490309r1=490308r2=490309 == --- tomcat/container/branches/tc5.0.x/webapps/docs/changelog.xml (original) +++ tomcat/container/branches/tc5.0.x/webapps/docs/changelog.xml Tue Dec 26 07:24:54 2006 @@ -65,6 +65,14 @@ /changelog /subsection + subsection name=Jasper +changelog + fix +bug39975/bug: Don't have static Log references in Jasper. (yoavs) + /fix +/changelog + /subsection + subsection name=Webapps changelog fix - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 39975] - Classloader refence leaks in jasper-runtime when webapp has log4j and commons-logging
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39975. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39975 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 07:25 --- Done for Tomcat 5.0 as well. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40000] - tomcat / context freezes when hitting maxActive parameter in (oracle) database resource
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||WORKSFORME --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 07:28 --- Don't set maxWait to -1. If you set it to something reasonable, when the pool is fully busy (i.e. active = maxActive), the pool will wait forever if maxWait = -1, hence the behavior you're seeing. If I set maxWait to a positive value I get the exception back right away as expected. Either way, if there's a bug here, it's much more likely a DBCP bug. It's DBCP doing the waiting. If you have a stack trace showing hung threads in Tomcat function calls after the queries have completed (not before), please feel free to reopen this issue and attach said stack trace. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40001] - HTML pages should not use GET to restart web-apps.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40001. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement Status|NEW |NEEDINFO --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 07:29 --- I like the easy functionality. I'm guessing you want a POST to better comply with some notion of HTTP semantics where GETs shouldn't do anything but read data? If so, please provide a patch accordingly. Setting Severity to enhancement. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40016] - SEVERE: Error filterStart
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40016. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40016 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 07:33 --- This is already done: see the filterStart method in org.apache.catalina.core.StandardContext. It will log the filter name and complete stack trace, at ERROR level, for every filter that fails. You can also enable DEBUG-level logging to see the filters getting started every time the server starts. If you don't want to have DEBUG-level logging on the whole server, enable it only for the above StandardContext class. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40211] - Compiled JSP don't indent HTML code
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40211. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40211 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 07:36 --- Changing to enhancement. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 38128] - directory listings DoS
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38128. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38128 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 07:56 --- (In reply to comment #5) There are a few things I dislike in this patch. You shouldn't catch Throwables and then silently not handle them. You shouldn't even do that with Exceptions, but certainly not Throwables. That by itself means -1 on the patch as it stands currently. I agree that catching Throwable is a really bad idea, however the DefaultServlet code does this repeatedly when accessing parameters from the servlet config. I chose to keep the code consistent and follow the pattern already prevalent when making this patch. I beleive it should be a simple matter to string replace Throwable with a more appropriate exception in this code. Then there's the overall weight of the solution: adding a custom cache and tying it into the default web.xml just for this case seems overweight. I wonder if there's an easier solution without caching, and certainly without a time-based cache which means additional background processing. One approach that comes to mind is a no-op XSLT for customizations, as documented in http://tomcat.apache.org/tomcat-5.0-doc/default-servlet.html#dir Finally, as you probably know directory listings are easy to disable: see http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=tomcat-userm=105525007220640w=2 for example of the one setting change required. For others concerned about this DoS (and I don't think there are any, seeing as how no one else has opined on this issue and/or posted such a DoS on the mailing lists), they can simply disable directory listings. Because of these, I'm going to mark this particular patch as WONTFIX. If someone else wants strongly feels this patch should be applied as-is, they can say so here. Otherwise, maybe a more lightweight patch can be attached to the issue (and the issue itself reopened), that is if anyone still cares. The caching this patch adds is not just a special purpose fix to eliminate a DoS, it also significantly improves the performance of directory listings in the general case. Please review my posts to the dev lists containing my benchmarks comparing performance with and without the patch in place. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 38128] - directory listings DoS
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38128. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38128 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 07:58 --- Note I've also converted existing DefaultServlet catch(Throwable t) code to catching exceptions. I saw your mailing list messages, and I believe the benchmarks. I still think this approach is too heavyweight. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40222] - Default Tomcat configuration alows easy session hijacking
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40222. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40222 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 11:31 --- (In reply to comment #1) Are you sure the same session is indeed carried over? I thought we'd implemented the opposite (new session when moving from HTTP to HTTPS), quite purposefully for security, as far back as Tomcat 3.x. See for example Yes, I am sure. The problem can be demonstrated like this: 1) Using HTTP, go to an insecure page which assigns a JSESSIONID (eg. any JSF page) 2) Notice the JSESSIONID (which can be sniffed on the network by man-in-the-middle) 3) Go to an authenticated HTTPS page (eg. via form-based login). Look at the secure data. The JSESSIONID is still the same! 4) From another computer, write the URL of the authenticated page including the JSESSIOND obtained in step 2 above. Bingo - the hacker is in! In order to circumvent the problem, we had to insert code into the login page which invalidates previously assigned session, loosing all session info. An easy fix in Tomcat would be to change (or append) the JSESSIONID upon switching from HTTP to HTTPS. Switching from HTTPS to HTTP is already forbidden as you mention, which is correct. Tomas -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 39053] - include Tomcat embedded sample
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39053. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39053 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 13:13 --- (In reply to comment #4) I don't feel I am apt to enhance the sample. If I knew so much about Tomcat's intricacies I wouldn't have opened the bug in the first place. The sample is what I could gather from some articles, but it is only rudimentary and should be over-worked by someone who knows Tomcat very well. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Apache Tomcat 6.0.7 alpha
The new build is now available for testing: http://www.apache.org/dist/tomcat/tomcat-6/v6.0.7-alpha/ Rémy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40208] - Request-Dump when ErrorDocument in httpd.conf is a jsp
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40208. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40208 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |NEEDINFO --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 16:31 --- I wouldn't post this as an httpd bug, unless you're also seeing strange behavior with httpd standalone (no Tomcat, no mod_jk, static HTML error page). I don't suppose you can test this with Tomcat 5.5.20 and a more recent mod_jk or Apache httpd (or both)? That would help us prioritize fixing this issue. What happens if you turn off the ErrorDocument directive in httpd (temporarily), and just use the Tomcat error page for Tomcat errors? Does that at least work properly? -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40728] - Catalina MBeans use non-serializable classes
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40728. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40728 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |NEEDINFO --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 16:34 --- Mmm, it's tempting to just add extends Serializable to the Lifecycle and LifecycleListener interfaces, and implements Serializable to the LifecycleSupport class. However, that's a bit risky as we might have all sorts of things that implement LifecycleListener and Lifecycle, and some of them may be custom user classes, and some may not be Serializable. OTOH, I wonder if that would really cause any damage. What specific Tomcat version were you working with? I'd like to replace nightly with an exact value. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41202] - strange ssl tomcat response
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41202. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41202 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 16:39 --- As others noted in the mailing list thread you link to, this is not a Tomcat bug if it's a bug at all. Personally, I think the NAK response (which is what these strange bytes are: they're not nonsense) is good, it's a legit no-handshake response. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 37326] - No error reported when jsp:include has non-existent target
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37326. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37326 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 16:45 --- Ooops, I guess I didn't get to this in a few days, did I? It's piqued my curiosity again. Thanks for going through the debugging steps and attaching the WAR. Your log4j configuration looks fine. I'll try to run an instrumented version of the code locally with more logging statements and see if I can learn anything. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 39255] - NullPointerException thrown in AuthenticatorBase.register method
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39255. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39255 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 16:56 --- Jees, I let this one slip a long time, didn't I? Sorry about that, and thanks again for reporting the bug originally. The fix has been committed to SVN. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 39581] - Maybe the Jasper translate jsp to wrong java code.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39581. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39581 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEEDINFO --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 16:58 --- I think the EL bug has been fixed since the last comment on this issue, no? James, can you please test 5.5.20 and let us know if it works better for you? -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 38484] - webapps Admin: Invalid path /login was requested
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38484. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38484 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED Priority|P4 |P3 Version|5.5.9 |5.5.17 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 17:00 --- Updating version to 5.5.17. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33453. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33453 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 17:13 --- (In reply to comment #62) Darryl's last comments aside on changing the management of the entire work tree, I want to ask Jonathan and anyone who's used his patches: have they been stable and OK? Have there been any modifications needed to them? If not, i.e. if they've been stable, I'm tempted to add them to the 5.5 tree. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33453] - Jasper should recompile JSP files whose datestamps change in either direction (not just newer)
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33453. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33453 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P1 |P3 Version|Nightly Build |5.5.9 -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40177] - RequestDumperValve causes getCharacterEncoding to be called
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40177. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40177 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|FIXED | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 18:59 --- Hi Yoav. Making the Javadocs more informative is indeed helpful. But, both Valves and Filters exist separately because they are useful for different use cases: Valves are useful when the administrator wants to do something with requests at the servlet container level, without modifying webapps that may or may not be owned or written by the administrator. Filters are useful when you are the webapp author, or when you're able and willing to modify the webapp, to do something with requests. There are valid uses for each, and the administrator should choose for themselves from the available options. I have found RequestDumperValve useful on a number of occasions where I wanted more info about the requests/responses to web applications I've developed, plus webapps that I didn't write. That includes webapps that were localized and internationalized (in development, not every bug needs to be investigated in character sets other than ISO8859-1). The RequestDumperValve has been around for quite a while now, and I find it quite useful, even if it doesn't do everything. Reopening to request the undeprecation of RequestDumperValve. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 39425] - catalina.policy precompiled jsps
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39425. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39425 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Version|5.0.16 |5.5.20 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 22:58 --- (In reply to comment #1) I don't see LIMIT_BUFFER in the latest PageContextImpl, on either the Tomcat 5.0 or 5.5 branches. Is this still needed? It's in class BodyContentImpl not in PageContextImpl. The above source line wasn't in 5.5.9 - it has been added after 5.5.9, I've seen it in 5.5.16, 5.5.17 and 5.5.20 -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 38131] - WatchedResource does not work if app is outside webapps
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38131.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38131
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 23:47 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
First, I'm changing this to an enhancement, as the current code is clearly
designed for absolute paths so what you're reporting is not a bug.
I get my infos from documentation and not from the source - and in the docs I
havn't found any info that you need absolute paths.
...
I'm guessing in your case the docBase is relative, not absolute, so the method
uses appBase as the context for docBase, and since your webapp is outside
appBase this doesn't work. Is my guess right? Does it work if you make your
docBase absolute?
My docBase is absolute like
Context docBase=${somedir}/appdir
and ${somedir} is absolute like c:/webapps.
And it doesn't work with
WatchedResourceWEB-INF/web.xml/WatchedResource
in conf/context.xml,
and it also doesn_t work with
WatchedResourcec:/webapps/appdir/WEB-INF/web.xml/WatchedResource
in conf/context.xml.
--
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
