users@jax-rpc.java.net

Re: List of needed Jars on the client side?

From: John Furton <jfurton_at_vocaldata.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 10:26:43 -0600

This seemed to be true for JWSDP 1.0 but the 1.1 version appears to
require some more. (I least I has to add the qname and some of the jaxb
jar files. )

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Lowe [mailto:rmlowe_at_RMLOWE.COM]
Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2003 10:19 AM
To: JAXRPC-INTEREST_at_JAVA.SUN.COM
Subject: Re: List of needed Jars on the client side?

There's a list in the JWSDP Release Notes (*not* the JAX-RPC RI Release
Notes), which includes the following: jaxrpc-api.jar, jaxrpc-ri.jar,
saaj-api.jar, saaj-ri.jar, activation.jar, commons-logging.jar,
dom4j.jar,
mail.jar, jaxp-api.jar, dom.jar, sax.jar, xalan.jar, xercesImpl.jar,
xsltc.jar. The total size is something like 5.8 MB.

My understanding is that one is required by the RI licence agreement to
distribute all of the above, including on clients.

Obviously, this is a significant drawback, and I suspect it will
discourage
a lot of people from using JAX-RPC on clients (especially applets/Web
Start)
unless this changes.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Benoit Lubek" <blubek_at_ICOMINFO.FR>
To: <JAXRPC-INTEREST_at_JAVA.SUN.COM>
Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2003 11:17 PM
Subject: List of needed Jars on the client side?


> Hello,
>
> We try to make a client application that will use JAX-RPC to
communicate
> with a server.
> We didn't find anywhere in the documentation of the JAX-RPC RI, a list
of
> the minimum set of jars needed on the client side. Is there such a
list
> somewhere? Because right now the only way we found was to take all the
jars
> in the various Jwsdp directories, and eliminate them one by one until
it
> doesn't work anymore, which doesn't look like an elegant way of doing
this.
>
> Another question: our client application has to be "light". We find
that
the
> needed jar "jaxrpc-ri.jar" weights alone 1,2MB. Is it possible to
remove
> some parts from this Jar to make it smaller? If so, what parts?
>
> If not, what other possibilities do we have to use SOAP on a "light"
client?
>
> Thank you very much for your help.
>
> B.LUBEK