From Andrew.Marlow at fisglobal.com  Mon Oct  1 09:15:27 2018
From: Andrew.Marlow at fisglobal.com (Marlow, Andrew)
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2018 13:15:27 +0000
Subject: [wildfly-dev] help needed configuring undertow for JBoss EAP 7.1
Message-ID: <AM0PR08MB3379107AB0266384444756CDEDEF0@AM0PR08MB3379.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>

Hello everyone,

I have been using JBoss 7.1.1 prior to Red Hat creating JBoss EAP. I have also been using Wildfly 9, brought on by Red Hat forking JBoss. Now I am trying to use JBoss EAP 7.1 which contains elements of Wildfly 4. I need help with the configuration please. An EAP change is that instead of subsystem webservices  I have to use undertow. I thought that would not be a problem and found several examples of undertow configuration for versions 3.1 and 4.0. None of them worked (details further below). So I tried version 2.0 which is what I have for my wildfly setup. That didn't work either. I am at my wits end. I don't know which version of undertow I should be using and I haven't the faintest idea what is wrong with my config.

Here is my undertow 2.0 config:

       <subsystem xmlns="urn:jboss:domain:undertow:2.0">
            <buffer-cache name="default"/>
            <server name="default-server">
                <http-listener name="default" socket-binding="http" redirect-socket="https"/>
                <host name="default-host" alias="localhost">
                    <location name="/" handler="welcome-content"/>
                    <filter-ref name="server-header"/>
                    <filter-ref name="x-powered-by-header"/>
                </host>
            </server>
            <servlet-container name="default">
                <jsp-config/>
                <websockets/>
            </servlet-container>
            <handlers>
                <file name="welcome-content" path="${jboss.home.dir}/welcome-content"/>
            </handlers>
            <filters>
                <response-header name="server-header" header-name="Server" header-value="WildFly/9"/>
                <response-header name="x-powered-by-header" header-name="X-Powered-By" header-value="Undertow/1"/>
            </filters>
        </subsystem>

The error I am getting is in server.log:

13:52:41,789 ERROR [org.jboss.as.controller] (Controller Boot Thread) WFLYCTL0362: Capabilities required by resource '/subsystem=undertow' are not available:
    org.wildfly.undertow.host.default-server.host; Possible registration points for this capability:
                                /subsystem=undertow/server=*/host=*
13:52:41,790 ERROR [org.jboss.as.controller] (Controller Boot Thread) WFLYCTL0362: Capabilities required by resource '/subsystem=undertow/server=default-server/host=default-host/location=/' are not available:
    org.wildfly.extension.undertow.handler.welcome-content; Possible registration points for this capability:
                                /subsystem=undertow/configuration=handler/file=*
                                /subsystem=undertow/configuration=handler/reverse-proxy=*
13:52:41,805 FATAL [org.jboss.as.server] (Controller Boot Thread) WFLYSRV0056: Server boot has failed in an unrecoverable manner; exiting. See previous messages for details.

Andrew Marlow
Consultant developer, Apex
38th Floor, 25 Canada Square,
Canary Wharf, London E14 5LQ
T:  020-8081-2367 / 07966-451-521
E: andrew.marlow at fisglobal.com<mailto:andrew.marlow at fisglobal.com>
FIS | Empowering the Financial World [cid:image001.png at 01D112FA.C4A77D90] <https://www.facebook.com/FIStoday> [cid:image002.png at 01D112FA.C4A77D90] <https://twitter.com/FISGlobal> [cid:image003.png at 01D112FA.C4A77D90] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/fis>
FIS Apex (UK) Limited * Registered in England and Wales No. 3573008 * Registered Office: 38th floor, 25 Canada Square, London, E14 5LQ, United Kingdom
[50_3]

The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/wildfly-dev/attachments/20181001/cec40a7e/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 807 bytes
Desc: image001.png
Url : http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/wildfly-dev/attachments/20181001/cec40a7e/attachment-0004.png 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 818 bytes
Desc: image002.png
Url : http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/wildfly-dev/attachments/20181001/cec40a7e/attachment-0005.png 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 796 bytes
Desc: image003.png
Url : http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/wildfly-dev/attachments/20181001/cec40a7e/attachment-0006.png 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.png
Type: image/png
Size: 19020 bytes
Desc: image004.png
Url : http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/wildfly-dev/attachments/20181001/cec40a7e/attachment-0007.png 

From ehugonne at redhat.com  Tue Oct  2 04:39:23 2018
From: ehugonne at redhat.com (Emmanuel Hugonnet)
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2018 10:39:23 +0200
Subject: [wildfly-dev] Static capability reference on attribute being
	defined / set to true
Message-ID: <7dba519b-0dc4-a446-bf27-72c0d8f3f387@redhat.com>

Hello,
Working on messaging clustering integration i wanted to require a static capability from clustering if an attribute was defined. There is
nothing to express that in the current metamodel so I introduced a specific CapabilityReferenceRecorder.
I was wondering if this use-case appears in other places: like for example the jts attribute in transactions that would require the iiop
capability if defined or set to true. Then i would port this code in core so it could be used and we could express those relationships in
the metamodel and thus in Galleon for provisioning.

Cheers,
Emmanuel

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/wildfly-dev/attachments/20181002/f631d243/attachment.bin 

From brian.stansberry at redhat.com  Tue Oct  2 18:27:30 2018
From: brian.stansberry at redhat.com (Brian Stansberry)
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2018 17:27:30 -0500
Subject: [wildfly-dev] Static capability reference on attribute being
 defined / set to true
In-Reply-To: <7dba519b-0dc4-a446-bf27-72c0d8f3f387@redhat.com>
References: <7dba519b-0dc4-a446-bf27-72c0d8f3f387@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <CAPhbRDaZSdSsdXu+pjo91t8Qb6D-CBNG6Y8PDBMpaOmx7vYvSw@mail.gmail.com>

Possibly relevant stuff:

https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/blob/master/security/subsystem/src/main/java/org/jboss/as/security/SecurityDomainAdd.java#L163

https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/blob/master/security/subsystem/src/main/java/org/jboss/as/security/SecurityDomainAdd.java#L202

Also, ages ago when I was first prototyping capabilities, I played a bit
with the transaction subsystem and IIOP because those two have an
interesting relationship. I have an old branch from that where I identified
a couple attributes that might fit this general area:

https://github.com/bstansberry/wildfly/commit/15d66e76ee66b9bb868fe64eda3f7924cd9236e7#diff-b6d27f270cf566c54b0b0875edc75536R425
https://github.com/bstansberry/wildfly/commit/15d66e76ee66b9bb868fe64eda3f7924cd9236e7#diff-356beb90ea81e63c12504948d5ea09b6R112

That branch is way out of date, so don't try to do anything with it other
than read it as a pointer to something to investigate.




On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 3:39 AM, Emmanuel Hugonnet <ehugonne at redhat.com>
wrote:

> Hello,
> Working on messaging clustering integration i wanted to require a static
> capability from clustering if an attribute was defined. There is
> nothing to express that in the current metamodel so I introduced a
> specific CapabilityReferenceRecorder.
> I was wondering if this use-case appears in other places: like for example
> the jts attribute in transactions that would require the iiop
> capability if defined or set to true. Then i would port this code in core
> so it could be used and we could express those relationships in
> the metamodel and thus in Galleon for provisioning.
>
> Cheers,
> Emmanuel
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> wildfly-dev mailing list
> wildfly-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
>



-- 
Brian Stansberry
Manager, Senior Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/wildfly-dev/attachments/20181002/7fbb4112/attachment.html 

From ehugonne at redhat.com  Wed Oct  3 11:57:47 2018
From: ehugonne at redhat.com (Emmanuel Hugonnet)
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2018 17:57:47 +0200
Subject: [wildfly-dev] Static capability reference on attribute being
 defined / set to true
In-Reply-To: <CAPhbRDaZSdSsdXu+pjo91t8Qb6D-CBNG6Y8PDBMpaOmx7vYvSw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <7dba519b-0dc4-a446-bf27-72c0d8f3f387@redhat.com>
	<CAPhbRDaZSdSsdXu+pjo91t8Qb6D-CBNG6Y8PDBMpaOmx7vYvSw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <79d6e738-94af-3658-602a-e19020077787@redhat.com>

Hello,

I'm afraid the clustering requirements in the SecurityDomainAdd don't qualify as those capabilities are dynamic even if in fact we use them
with a fixed value so we can't find a registration to it.

Some of the DefaultableUnaryServiceNameFactoryProvider might qualify since those default capabilities could be required if no value is defined.

So apart from JTS and our Messaging use case i don't really see any other place that would qualify :(

Emmanuel



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/wildfly-dev/attachments/20181003/285c7453/attachment.bin 

From rory.odonnell at oracle.com  Mon Oct 15 05:57:54 2018
From: rory.odonnell at oracle.com (Rory O'Donnell)
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2018 10:57:54 +0100
Subject: [wildfly-dev] JDK 12 Early Access build 15 is available
Message-ID: <ba2375c9-4bd6-3d99-92f2-ec1737ccf25b@oracle.com>

Hi David & Richard,*
*

*JDK 12 Early Access build 15 is available at : - jdk.java.net/12/*

  * JDK 12 Schedule is confirmed.
      o 2018/12/13 Rampdown Phase One <http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/3#rdp-1>
      o 2019/01/17 Rampdown Phase Two <http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/3#rdp-2>
      o 2019/02/07 Release-Candidate Phase
        <http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/3#rc>
      o 2019/03/19 General Availability
  * Release Notes for JDK 12 [1]
  * JEPs targeted to JDK 12, so far
      o 325: Switch Expressions (Preview [2]) - Integrated
      o 326: Raw String Literals (Preview [2]) - Integrated
      o 340: One AArch64 Port, Not Two
        <http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/340> - Targeted
      o 341: Default CDS Archives <http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/341>-
        Integrated
  * Important fixes since last email
      o (b15)? Implementation of JEP 341: Default CDS Archives
      o (b14) LDAPS Communication Failure (JDK-8211107
        <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8211107>)
      o (b14) Support dns_canonicalize_hostname in krb5.conf
        (JDK-8210821 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8210821>)
      o (b14) Removal of com.sun.awt.SecurityWarning Class (JDK-8210692
        <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8210692>)


*JDK 8u202 planning [3]*

  * 8u202 is proposed to be the last Oracle led release for this OpenJDK
    Project.
  * A proposed timeline is as follows :
      o July 2018 8u-dev forest begins collecting 8u202 fixes
      o Mid October 2018 RampDown 2
      o Mid January 2019 GA

Rgds, Rory

[1] http://jdk.java.net/12/release-notes
[2] http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/12
[3] 
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2018-September/007923.html<http://jdk.java.net/12/release-notes>
<https://download.java.net/java/early_access/jmc7/core/common/docs/api/overview-summary.html> 


-- 
Rgds,Rory O'Donnell
Quality Engineering Manager
Oracle EMEA , Dublin, Ireland

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/wildfly-dev/attachments/20181015/51033e38/attachment-0001.html 

From ehugonne at redhat.com  Fri Oct 26 09:13:17 2018
From: ehugonne at redhat.com (Emmanuel Hugonnet)
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 15:13:17 +0200
Subject: [wildfly-dev] Component error ids change
Message-ID: <14632a66-1251-7c99-9a04-3cb221e84c1b@redhat.com>

Hello,

I'm looking to use the Apache Artemis upstream 2.6.x branch as a component for WildFly. The error ids have changed because of some
duplication cf. [1]).

Is it ok for those ids to change ? Do we have to manage that change at the subsystem level ?

Cheers,

Emmanuel


[1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-1018


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/wildfly-dev/attachments/20181026/9ce876de/attachment.bin 

From brian.stansberry at redhat.com  Fri Oct 26 09:50:38 2018
From: brian.stansberry at redhat.com (Brian Stansberry)
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 08:50:38 -0500
Subject: [wildfly-dev] Component error ids change
In-Reply-To: <14632a66-1251-7c99-9a04-3cb221e84c1b@redhat.com>
References: <14632a66-1251-7c99-9a04-3cb221e84c1b@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <CAPhbRDbts__4ofJgVtzvyTMM-+26vgKF_V2N69pRX7=dkN38AQ@mail.gmail.com>

IMHO WildFly is not responsible for the message codes of components it
consumes.

If Artemis had two messages with the same code, and it changed the code for
one to correct the duplication, there's nothing wrong with that. WildFly
doesn't guarantee bug-for-bug compatibility across releases so I don't see
why Artemis should.

If it took a code and re-used it for some other message unrelated to its
previous use(s), well that's not good but IMO not something WF can try and
correct.

If it completely reworked its message code scheme, well we did too in WF 8.
And again not something we can try and correct.


On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 8:13 AM, Emmanuel Hugonnet <ehugonne at redhat.com>
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I'm looking to use the Apache Artemis upstream 2.6.x branch as a component
> for WildFly. The error ids have changed because of some
> duplication cf. [1]).
>
> Is it ok for those ids to change ? Do we have to manage that change at the
> subsystem level ?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Emmanuel
>
>
> [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-1018
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> wildfly-dev mailing list
> wildfly-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
>



-- 
Brian Stansberry
Manager, Senior Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/wildfly-dev/attachments/20181026/f24a6258/attachment.html