You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
While gretty detects the presence of a context.xml file in the WAR file at the expected location, I was puzzled that it had no effect. While searching on the net, found an unresolved issue akhikhl#415 in the old gretty repository (akhikhl/gretty). Digging further, I found out with my lousy Groovy knowledge that in TomcatServerConfigurer.groovy a member variable of the "context" variable called "configFile" is populated by either the path to the context.xml file included in the WAR or by the path given in the gretty configuration. However, I did not find any location in the code where this variable is read and processed, i.e. given to Tomcat for further interpreting the content. This explains the observed behaviour. It would be nice if you could fix this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Ah, I now see that I misunderstood the code. "context" already seems to be the respective Tomcat object that is getting initialized. So it is obviously correct that I could not find any further use of "configFile". Nevertheless, it still seems that the setting is without any effect. Therefore I leave the issue open for now.
While gretty detects the presence of a context.xml file in the WAR file at the expected location, I was puzzled that it had no effect. While searching on the net, found an unresolved issue akhikhl#415 in the old gretty repository (akhikhl/gretty). Digging further, I found out with my lousy Groovy knowledge that in TomcatServerConfigurer.groovy a member variable of the "context" variable called "configFile" is populated by either the path to the context.xml file included in the WAR or by the path given in the gretty configuration. However, I did not find any location in the code where this variable is read and processed, i.e. given to Tomcat for further interpreting the content. This explains the observed behaviour. It would be nice if you could fix this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: