[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [equinox-dev] config.ini and equinox aspects

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I think it has something to do
with the simple configurator bundle
(org.eclipse.equinox.simpleconfigurator_1.0.0.v20080604.jar) and how
it is used to bootstrap the loading of other bundles.

Here is the exception I get (the first line of the stack trace only).
As I said, this exception is thrown, but somehow, the bundle is still
able to be loaded.

org.osgi.framework.BundleException: The bundle could not be resolved.
Reason: Missing Constraint: Require-Bundle: org.aspectj.weaver;
bundle-version="0.0.0"
at org.eclipse.osgi.framework.internal.core.BundleHost.startWorker(BundleHost.java:305)
<snip/>


What happens is this (I think):

1. there is an attempt to start the weaving service at level 1
2. but this requires starting org.aspectj.weaver and org.aspectj.runtime
3. since these two bundles are not specified in the config.ini, but
rather the org.eclipse.equinox.simpleconfigurator/bundles.info file,
these two bundles cannot be located until the simple configurator
bundle is completely started.  (so an exception is thrown)
4.  Once the simple configurator bundle is started, the aspectj weaver
and runtime can now be found and the weaving service can finally be
started.

(note- this is only a conjecture based on what I know about equinox (not much))

Does this make any sense?



On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 11:49 PM, Martin Lippert <lippert@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Andrew!
>
>> Just tried out the latest version of equinox aspects and am
>> successfully weaving against OSGi head.  That's great.
>
> :-)
>
>> However, I am still getting an error when the equinox aspects weaver
>> is started at level 1.  This problem goes away if I start it instead
>> at level 4.
>
> Hm, that is strange. You are getting an error when the weaving service is
> started at level 1? What error do you get?
>
>> Starting the weaving service at level 4 doesn't seem to be giving me
>> any problems, but you are suggesting that it is not working.  Should I
>> not be doing this?
>
> I am a bit irritating since starting with level 1 works for me, starting at
> level 4 not. Why do you have the opposite behavior? Interesting... ;-)
>
> Would be nice to have a version that works with both... Working on that...
>
> Can you nevertheless send me the error you get starting it at level 1?
> Thanks!!!
>
> -Martin
>