Community
Participate
Working Groups
Build ID: 3.3.0 - I20070625-1500 Steps To Reproduce: 1. Setup project structure as described in http://www.i-proving.ca/space/RCP+and+Java+Web+Start?showComments=true#startComments 2. After exporting the *feature.jnlp.feature.xml file, attempt to run the root *.jnlp file. 3. JaWS will fail with an exception similar to: java.io.FileNotFoundException: c:\devel\webstart\plugins\org.eclipse.swt.wpf.win32.x86_3.3.0.v3346.jar (The system cannot find the file specified) 4. Edit the features/org.eclipse.rcp*.jnlp file to remove the references to org.eclipse.swt.wpf.*.jar and org.eclipse.equinox.launcher.wpf.win32.*.jar. 5. Relaunch the root *.jnlp file and see the application load successfully. More information:
This is a problem with the generation of the .jnlp files. The generated .jnlp is for all configs even though only bundles for the built config are being included. The missing jars are not normally a problem since JavaWS filters on the os/arch. It seems that there is no filtering on WS so JavaWS looks for the wpf jars which were not included in the build. This will be a problem for any platform where we support multiple ws's and the build does not include both of those ws's The generated .jnlp file should probably only list jars that are actually included in the archive.
Jeff and I hit this issue today, we should look at getting it fixed in 3.5... There indeed is no way for JNLP to filter on WS... so maybe we should only really list what is included??
understood but there is no real notion of what is going in the archive (or even that there is an archive) at the time that the jnlp files are being generated. Additional stuff can be added to the update site at any time.
Hi, is there any chances that this bug will be addressed in 3.6 cycle? Thanks, Vadim
Yes, this can be looked at in 3.6
Currently we are not actively enhancing PDE build anymore. Therefore, I close this bug as WONTFIX. Please reopen, if you plan to provide a fix.
This bug hasn't had any activity in quite some time. Maybe the problem got resolved, was a duplicate of something else, or became less pressing for some reason - or maybe it's still relevant but just hasn't been looked at yet. If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please add it. The information can be, for example, that the problem still occurs, that you still want the feature, that more information is needed, or that the bug is (for whatever reason) no longer relevant. -- The automated Eclipse Genie.
