Hello, again, Markus.
Markus KARG wrote:
> Tim,
>
> once more, thanks a lot! To sum up both threads, and to verify that I
> have correctly understood your brilliant idea, can you confirm that
> this is what you want me to do:
>
> * Create a Workaround.jar file that contains nothing but a
> META-INF/MANIFEST.MF file.
> * The META-INF/MANIFEST.MF file contains the declaration of
> "WorkaroundExtension".
> * The META-INF/MANIFEST.MF file contains a Class-Path: attribute that
> lists all the JARs of JDIC and JMF that I can found out to be needed
> (in case if JDIC: jdic.jar and jdic_stub.jar, in case of JMF at least
> jmf.jar plus possibly a list of currently unknown JARs).
> * My Java EE Client Application JAR's META-INF/MANIFEST.MF shall
> reference the "WorkaroundExtension" as a needed optional package.
> * Put the Workaround.jar in JRE/lib/ext manually on each client
> (Thanks god that I know all the workplaces and my application is not a
> public place with thousand of anoynmous users).
Another possibility for depositing workaround.jar on each client would
be for you to build your own, small, JNLP installer extension. The
GlassFish built-in support will not be able to provide you any help with
this, but you might want to investigate it and see if it would meet your
needs. But you've understood my basic point.
>
> Right?
Yes, that's what I was suggesting. Let's not call this idea brilliant
until we know it works! ;-)
If it makes sense in the general case workaround.jar could contain some
classes also, but for the problems you are facing its role is to declare
the WorkaroundExtension and refer to the other JARs, just as you have
summarized.
>
> This sounds like a standards compliant, vendor- and platform neutral,
> in short: brilliant, solution to my problems (as long as I can find
> out what JARs JMF is really installing into my system, besides
> jmf.jar)! You really are an inexhaustable source of "bad" tricks. ;-)
I am not sure if this is a good thing or not!
>
> I will try it out in the next hours and will post the results. I think
> it will be interesting for other users, too.
>
> BTW, do you have any idea whom to write to suggest putting correct
> manifests into JDIC and JMF? Seems Sun lost interest in both projects,
> since I just cannot find out a current email address that is not
> returned by Sun's Mail Server... :-(
Perhaps create a new defect at jdic.dev.java.net for JDIC and to create
a separate bug at
http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/ for JMF.
Best of luck and please do report your results.
- Tim