Re: JAXB not available on Tomcat 9 and Java 10

2018-08-09 Thread Christopher Schultz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Nicolaj, On 8/8/18 1:17 AM, Nicolai Parlog wrote: > Hi, > > with the help of an answer on StackOverflow we have solved this. > In case anybody was watching this, here's what happened... > > First some random facts: > > * if not given a class

Re: JAXB not available on Tomcat 9 and Java 10

2018-08-07 Thread Nicolai Parlog
Hi, with the help of an answer on StackOverflow we have solved this. In case anybody was watching this, here's what happened... First some random facts: * if not given a class loader (https://javaee.github.io/jaxb-v2/doc/user-guide/ch06.html#d0e6919), `JAXBContext::newInstance` will use

Re: JAXB not available on Tomcat 9 and Java 10

2018-08-01 Thread Mark Thomas
On 27/07/18 15:36, Nicolai Parlog wrote: > Hi Christopher, > > unfortunately that didn't change the observable behavior - exact same > error message as when the JARs were in the application's lib folder. Java 10.0.2 Tomcat 9.0.11-dev I added the following to WEB-INF/lib: activation-1.1.1.jar

Re: JAXB not available on Tomcat 9 and Java 10

2018-07-27 Thread Nicolai Parlog
Hi Christopher, unfortunately that didn't change the observable behavior - exact same error message as when the JARs were in the application's lib folder. so long ... Nicolai On 26.07.2018 17:37, Christopher Schultz wrote: > Nicolai, > > On 7/26/18 6:41 AM, Nicolai Parlog wrote: >> Hi! >

Re: JAXB not available on Tomcat 9 and Java 10

2018-07-26 Thread Christopher Schultz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Nicolai, On 7/26/18 6:41 AM, Nicolai Parlog wrote: > Hi! > > TL;DR: On Java 10.0.1, a web app in Tomcat 9.0.8.0 has no access to > JAXB even though its reference implementation is present on the > class path. > > (This looks like a bug to me, but

JAXB not available on Tomcat 9 and Java 10

2018-07-26 Thread Nicolai Parlog
Hi! TL;DR: On Java 10.0.1, a web app in Tomcat 9.0.8.0 has no access to JAXB even though its reference implementation is present on the class path. (This looks like a bug to me, but "Before you report a bug" urged me to ask here first. :) ) NOTE: I already asked [on