No I mean deploy/naming-jboss-beans.xml referencing the ServiceBindingManager:
(the double "port" reference is probably a mistake, as well)
<property name="port">1099</property>
<property name="port">
<value-factory bean="ServiceBindingManager"
method="getIntBinding">
<parameter>jboss:service=Naming</parameter>
<parameter>Port</parameter>
</value-factory>
</property>
<!-- The bootstrap JNP server bind address. This also sets the default
RMI service bind address. Empty == all addresses
-->
<property
name="bindAddress">${jboss.bind.address:localhost}</property>
<!-- The port of the RMI naming service, 0 == anonymous -->
<property name="rmiPort">
<value-factory bean="ServiceBindingManager"
method="getIntBinding">
<parameter>jboss:service=Naming</parameter>
<parameter>RmiPort</parameter>
</value-factory>
</property>
Ok, so I can create a simplified version of this for the minimal config. Just tested it
locally and it boots fine.
Scott Stark wrote:
You mean bootstrap.xml references it. I assume this was because of
the
other services in conf/jboss-service.xml using the bindings. If no
deployers due, this should be moved to deploy/bindings-jboss-beans.xml.
Dimitris Andreadis wrote:
> It's only needed because the naming-jboss-beans.xml descriptor
> references it, I think.
>
> If we simplify the descriptor, we should be able to do without it.
>
> Scott Stark wrote:
>> I don't think we want the bindings service in minimal. Do we still
>> need the bindings.xml in bootstrap?
>>
>> P.S. I forgot about the minimal config. Should that be part of the
>> smoke-tests?
>>
_______________________________________________
jboss-development mailing list
jboss-development(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development