March 2010 - jboss-dev-forums - Jboss List Archives

[JBoss Microcontainer Development] New message: "Undemand processing is wrong"

by Adrian Brock

JBoss development, A new message was posted in the thread "Undemand processing is wrong": http://community.jboss.org/message/530199#530199 Author : Adrian Brock Profile : http://community.jboss.org/people/adrian@jboss.org Message: -------------------------------------------------------------- One of the tests in the JMX testsuite actually shows it was wrong, but it is asserting the wrong thing. :-) Consider the following test: <mbean name="A" mode="ON_DEMAND"/> <mbean name="B"> <depends>A</depends> </mbean> As per the original JMX rules, that will set up two dependencies B->A at CREATE B->A at START Now assume everything is at INSTALLED. If I do B.stop() what is happening now is the uninstall of undemanded contexts will say that A is no longer required. It correctly works out that A is still required for the CREATE dependency, and that it is no longer required for the START dependency. So what would you expect it to do? 1) Move A back to DESCRIBE, even B needs it for the CREATE dependency 2) Move A back to CREATE which is what B demands 3) Don't do anything with A The current answer is (1), which is obviously wrong. When A goes back to DESCRIBE, then B will also be destroyed (because of the dependency at CREATE) which is not what I asked for. I've got a fix that makes it do (3). i.e. while something still wants an ON_DEMAND service, it will stay in the fully INSTALLED state (or its current state if somebody moved it). This makes sense to me, since enabling an on demand service doesn't move it to an incompletely deployed state, so why should undemanding do that? I don't actually like this processing. Like I said when I originally did the ON_DEMAND processing, you don't want to bounce your ON_DEMAND webserver just because you are redeploying your only web-app. ;-) -------------------------------------------------------------- To reply to this message visit the message page: http://community.jboss.org/message/530199#530199

16 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss Tools Development] New message: "Re: Content Assist in attributes which should be filled with id's"

by Max Andersen

JBoss development, A new message was posted in the thread "Content Assist in attributes which should be filled with id's": http://community.jboss.org/message/530197#530197 Author : Max Andersen Profile : http://community.jboss.org/people/max.andersen@jboss.com Message: -------------------------------------------------------------- yeah im also looking for something more concrete since "facelets templating" is probably what we got the *most* support for so wondering what we are missing ? -------------------------------------------------------------- To reply to this message visit the message page: http://community.jboss.org/message/530197#530197

16 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss Microcontainer Development] New message: "Re: Security problems with org.jboss.test:jboss-test 1.1.5.GA"

by Adrian Brock

JBoss development, A new message was posted in the thread "Security problems with org.jboss.test:jboss-test 1.1.5.GA": http://community.jboss.org/message/530194#530194 Author : Adrian Brock Profile : http://community.jboss.org/people/adrian@jboss.org Message: -------------------------------------------------------------- Looks like a bug to me, but I don't see any recent changes in the code that would cause the problem? The SecurityManager shouldn't be installed until it runs AbstractTestDelegate.setUp() The error above is happening in the constructor of the delegate. Its only after that happens that you can do: delegate.enableSecurity = true; Most likely, there is a security manager still around from a previous test? -------------------------------------------------------------- To reply to this message visit the message page: http://community.jboss.org/message/530194#530194

16 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss Microcontainer Development] New message: "Re: Security problems with org.jboss.test:jboss-test 1.1.5.GA"

by ANIL SALDHANA

JBoss development, A new message was posted in the thread "Security problems with org.jboss.test:jboss-test 1.1.5.GA": http://community.jboss.org/message/530193#530193 Author : ANIL SALDHANA Profile : http://community.jboss.org/people/anil.saldhana@jboss.com Message: -------------------------------------------------------------- If the SM disable for the test class is simpler, go for it. Surprisingly, Adrian has not documented his test class. He usually is very good at it. Ha Ha!! Adding a Privileged Block does not mean you are bypassing security (in all cases). -------------------------------------------------------------- To reply to this message visit the message page: http://community.jboss.org/message/530193#530193

16 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss Tools Development] New message: "Re: Content Assist in attributes which should be filled with id's"

by Alexey Kazakov

JBoss development, A new message was posted in the thread "Content Assist in attributes which should be filled with id's": http://community.jboss.org/message/530192#530192 Author : Alexey Kazakov Email : akazakov(a)exadel.com Profile : http://community.jboss.org/people/akazakov Message: -------------------------------------------------------------- Facelets templating? What kind of feature do you mean here? We already have some support of it in VPE and code completion. For example <ui:composition template="|" > suggests available pages. What else could be useful? WDYT? -------------------------------------------------------------- To reply to this message visit the message page: http://community.jboss.org/message/530192#530192

16 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss Microcontainer Development] New message: "Re: Security problems with org.jboss.test:jboss-test 1.1.5.GA"

by Ales Justin

JBoss development, A new message was posted in the thread "Security problems with org.jboss.test:jboss-test 1.1.5.GA": http://community.jboss.org/message/530190#530190 Author : Ales Justin Profile : http://community.jboss.org/people/alesj Message: -------------------------------------------------------------- > Why not add a Privileged Block to the test class rather than do all the SM disable/enable circus? This won't work -- as the test itself is already under security, hence privileged block would kick-in too late. e.g. otherwise one could always get past it by simply declaring pb -- but who knows this better then you ;-) > In addition to the Priv Block addition, you will have to figure out what is the security policy the security mgr is using. Because you will have to add policy permission there for your test class. OK, unless you do this -- which is much more work than simple SM disable/enable. It's not like we're breaching security here :-), it's just that we want to stick with it, in order to see if the tested code actually has proper PBs, not the test itself. ;-) -------------------------------------------------------------- To reply to this message visit the message page: http://community.jboss.org/message/530190#530190

16 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss Microcontainer Development] New message: "Re: Security problems with org.jboss.test:jboss-test 1.1.5.GA"

by ANIL SALDHANA

JBoss development, A new message was posted in the thread "Security problems with org.jboss.test:jboss-test 1.1.5.GA": http://community.jboss.org/message/530184#530184 Author : ANIL SALDHANA Profile : http://community.jboss.org/people/anil.saldhana@jboss.com Message: -------------------------------------------------------------- Why not add a Privileged Block to the test class rather than do all the SM disable/enable circus? In addition to the Priv Block addition, you will have to figure out what is the security policy the security mgr is using. Because you will have to add policy permission there for your test class. -------------------------------------------------------------- To reply to this message visit the message page: http://community.jboss.org/message/530184#530184

16 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss Microcontainer Development] New message: "Re: Security problems with org.jboss.test:jboss-test 1.1.5.GA"

by Ales Justin

JBoss development, A new message was posted in the thread "Security problems with org.jboss.test:jboss-test 1.1.5.GA": http://community.jboss.org/message/530170#530170 Author : Ales Justin Profile : http://community.jboss.org/people/alesj Message: -------------------------------------------------------------- > > I think we should try to figure out the privileged block in the code that is being tested (and I am presuming AOP). No, as you can see, in this case it's the test class that needs to read off System properties. I would simply suspend the SM for this Sys props invocation, only to restore it to potentially indentify any AOP missing blocks Anil is talking about. -------------------------------------------------------------- To reply to this message visit the message page: http://community.jboss.org/message/530170#530170

16 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss Tools Development] New message: "Content Assist in attributes which should be filled with id's"

by Ilya Shaikovsky

JBoss development, A new message was posted in the thread "Content Assist in attributes which should be filled with id's": http://community.jboss.org/message/530169#530169 Author : Ilya Shaikovsky Profile : http://community.jboss.org/people/ilya_shaikovsky Message: -------------------------------------------------------------- Guys! It's really superb thing to have assist in for example Ajax4jsf command component *reRender* attribute which *suggest all id's defined on the page*. How about to consider *facelets templating*? Do you have plans on it? It will make the feature briliant! +P.S. really like Version: 3.0.0.CR2+ -------------------------------------------------------------- To reply to this message visit the message page: http://community.jboss.org/message/530169#530169

16 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss Microcontainer Development] New message: "Re: Security problems with org.jboss.test:jboss-test 1.1.5.GA"

by ANIL SALDHANA

JBoss development, A new message was posted in the thread "Security problems with org.jboss.test:jboss-test 1.1.5.GA": http://community.jboss.org/message/530168#530168 Author : ANIL SALDHANA Profile : http://community.jboss.org/people/anil.saldhana@jboss.com Message: -------------------------------------------------------------- Look at the last comment in Adrian's thread. He says the test is designed such that missing privileged blocks in the code that is being tested can be determined and applied. This is really really important for projects to do before hand. In the end, it is I who gets to do the clean up of figuring out the privileged blocks in projects and notify the projects integrating into the AS/EAP. I think we should try to figure out the privileged block in the code that is being tested (and I am presuming AOP). -------------------------------------------------------------- To reply to this message visit the message page: http://community.jboss.org/message/530168#530168

16 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

jboss-dev-forums March 2010