Precompiling an entire application

I’m in a situation where I’m trying to integrate my application with
another piece of software. That software only works with java bytecode, so
I’m trying to precompile everything.

For a bit of background, I used the version 4.5 tomcat installer on
windows. I moved my application to c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT\ and it
runs quite nicely.

Next I tried to create a mapping to “/” with
“c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT” as the resource and then assigned the
archive to mapping. I then removed the resource mapping and set the
primary to “archive”, leaving only a path to the .ra file that was created
under c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT\WEB-INF\lucee\context\archives. To test
if the application is using the archive, I renamed a cfm file that is
contained in the archive and tried to access it, but I get a 404. I tried
the same thing with a cfc file and any CreateObject calls to that cfc fails.

Then I tried basically the same thing as above, but instead of mapping to
ROOT, I mapped to a subfolder of root that contains the majority of my
application. Using the same tests as before, cfc files are being found,
however cfm files still return 404.

I’m starting to be convinced that archive mappings are not working as
intended.

After fighting with all that, I would like to take a different approach
that, in theory, would afford me more flexibility as the application
evolves. I would simply like to “touch” every file on deployment such that
.class files are generated in the cfclasses folder.

So my question is, what might be the best way to get make all cfm and cfc
files in my application precompile into the cfclasses folder? Is this even
possible? Do I need to write a batch script that will hit all possible
URLs in my application? I’m worried that if I take that approach, the
security settings I have in my Application.cfc that prevents all except for
a few cfm files to be directly web-accessible will cause problems. That
security makes it so most of my application files must be accessed through
the a controller. The controller will prevent any non-logged-in request
from touching those files.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated. I’ve been banging my head against
this wall for a week now. Thanks!

hmmLe lundi 4 mai 2015 03:54:54 UTC+2, upfron...@gmail.com a écrit :

I’m in a situation where I’m trying to integrate my application with
another piece of software. That software only works with java bytecode, so
I’m trying to precompile everything.

For a bit of background, I used the version 4.5 tomcat installer on
windows. I moved my application to c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT\ and it
runs quite nicely.

Next I tried to create a mapping to “/” with
“c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT” as the resource and then assigned the
archive to mapping. I then removed the resource mapping and set the
primary to “archive”, leaving only a path to the .ra file that was created
under c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT\WEB-INF\lucee\context\archives. To test
if the application is using the archive, I renamed a cfm file that is
contained in the archive and tried to access it, but I get a 404. I tried
the same thing with a cfc file and any CreateObject calls to that cfc fails.

Then I tried basically the same thing as above, but instead of mapping to
ROOT, I mapped to a subfolder of root that contains the majority of my
application. Using the same tests as before, cfc files are being found,
however cfm files still return 404.

I’m starting to be convinced that archive mappings are not working as
intended.

After fighting with all that, I would like to take a different approach
that, in theory, would afford me more flexibility as the application
evolves. I would simply like to “touch” every file on deployment such that
.class files are generated in the cfclasses folder.

So my question is, what might be the best way to get make all cfm and cfc
files in my application precompile into the cfclasses folder? Is this even
possible? Do I need to write a batch script that will hit all possible
URLs in my application? I’m worried that if I take that approach, the
security settings I have in my Application.cfc that prevents all except for
a few cfm files to be directly web-accessible will cause problems. That
security makes it so most of my application files must be accessed through
the a controller. The controller will prevent any non-logged-in request
from touching those files.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated. I’ve been banging my head
against this wall for a week now. Thanks!

“I’m starting to be convinced that archive mappings are not working as
intended.”
Take the Lucee admin as an example (/lucee/admin.cfm) that is an archive
you used to do all this… :wink:
We also have clients that use archives for the complete website, with not a
single cfm file on the server!

You are writing about .ra files, but then also from lucee. Have in mind
that .ra (Railo archive) are not compatible with Lucee, you need .lar files
for Lucee.
The welcome files to not work with archives (depending on the servlet
engine used), best test with the file name (/index.cfm) when you call a
file.
Components only work if you have part of the package as entry point in the
virtual path of the mapping (for compatibility reasons to ACF)
It is best to do component map for your components anyway. In the wiki you
can find some details about this…

Micha

Am Montag, 4. Mai 2015 schrieb :> I’m in a situation where I’m trying to integrate my application with

another piece of software. That software only works with java bytecode, so
I’m trying to precompile everything.

For a bit of background, I used the version 4.5 tomcat installer on
windows. I moved my application to c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT\ and it
runs quite nicely.

Next I tried to create a mapping to “/” with
“c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT” as the resource and then assigned the
archive to mapping. I then removed the resource mapping and set the
primary to “archive”, leaving only a path to the .ra file that was created
under c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT\WEB-INF\lucee\context\archives. To test
if the application is using the archive, I renamed a cfm file that is
contained in the archive and tried to access it, but I get a 404. I tried
the same thing with a cfc file and any CreateObject calls to that cfc fails.

Then I tried basically the same thing as above, but instead of mapping to
ROOT, I mapped to a subfolder of root that contains the majority of my
application. Using the same tests as before, cfc files are being found,
however cfm files still return 404.

I’m starting to be convinced that archive mappings are not working as
intended.

After fighting with all that, I would like to take a different approach
that, in theory, would afford me more flexibility as the application
evolves. I would simply like to “touch” every file on deployment such that
.class files are generated in the cfclasses folder.

So my question is, what might be the best way to get make all cfm and cfc
files in my application precompile into the cfclasses folder? Is this even
possible? Do I need to write a batch script that will hit all possible
URLs in my application? I’m worried that if I take that approach, the
security settings I have in my Application.cfc that prevents all except for
a few cfm files to be directly web-accessible will cause problems. That
security makes it so most of my application files must be accessed through
the a controller. The controller will prevent any non-logged-in request
from touching those files.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated. I’ve been banging my head
against this wall for a week now. Thanks!


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
“Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,‘cvml’,‘lucee%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com’);>.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,‘cvml’,‘lucee@googlegroups.com’);>.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/b11e74b8-e166-4305-9ad6-46f0c7102799%40googlegroups.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/b11e74b8-e166-4305-9ad6-46f0c7102799%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

What version do you use, this was a bug in a early version on Lucee 4.5…

Micha

Am Montag, 4. Mai 2015 schrieb :> Thanks, Micha.

If .ra files are incompatible, why does the lucee admin create .ra files
when I go to download an archive from a mapping or assign an archive to a
mapping. I did find it odd that I was getting .ra files from this process
even though the lucee admin is using a .lar file.

On Monday, May 4, 2015 at 2:29:10 AM UTC-4, Micha wrote:

“I’m starting to be convinced that archive mappings are not working as
intended.”
Take the Lucee admin as an example (/lucee/admin.cfm) that is an archive
you used to do all this… :wink:
We also have clients that use archives for the complete website, with not
a single cfm file on the server!

You are writing about .ra files, but then also from lucee. Have in mind
that .ra (Railo archive) are not compatible with Lucee, you need .lar files
for Lucee.
The welcome files to not work with archives (depending on the servlet
engine used), best test with the file name (/index.cfm) when you call a
file.
Components only work if you have part of the package as entry point in
the virtual path of the mapping (for compatibility reasons to ACF)
It is best to do component map for your components anyway. In the wiki
you can find some details about this…

Micha

Am Montag, 4. Mai 2015 schrieb :

I’m in a situation where I’m trying to integrate my application with
another piece of software. That software only works with java bytecode, so
I’m trying to precompile everything.

For a bit of background, I used the version 4.5 tomcat installer on
windows. I moved my application to c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT\ and it
runs quite nicely.

Next I tried to create a mapping to “/” with
“c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT” as the resource and then assigned the
archive to mapping. I then removed the resource mapping and set the
primary to “archive”, leaving only a path to the .ra file that was created
under c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT\WEB-INF\lucee\context\archives. To test
if the application is using the archive, I renamed a cfm file that is
contained in the archive and tried to access it, but I get a 404. I tried
the same thing with a cfc file and any CreateObject calls to that cfc fails.

Then I tried basically the same thing as above, but instead of mapping
to ROOT, I mapped to a subfolder of root that contains the majority of my
application. Using the same tests as before, cfc files are being found,
however cfm files still return 404.

I’m starting to be convinced that archive mappings are not working as
intended.

After fighting with all that, I would like to take a different approach
that, in theory, would afford me more flexibility as the application
evolves. I would simply like to “touch” every file on deployment such that
.class files are generated in the cfclasses folder.

So my question is, what might be the best way to get make all cfm and
cfc files in my application precompile into the cfclasses folder? Is this
even possible? Do I need to write a batch script that will hit all
possible URLs in my application? I’m worried that if I take that approach,
the security settings I have in my Application.cfc that prevents all except
for a few cfm files to be directly web-accessible will cause problems.
That security makes it so most of my application files must be accessed
through the a controller. The controller will prevent any non-logged-in
request from touching those files.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated. I’ve been banging my head
against this wall for a week now. Thanks!


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups “Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/b11e74b8-e166-4305-9ad6-46f0c7102799%40googlegroups.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/b11e74b8-e166-4305-9ad6-46f0c7102799%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
“Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,‘cvml’,‘lucee%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com’);>.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,‘cvml’,‘lucee@googlegroups.com’);>.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/f4f73f7f-e06e-439c-b13e-56b1a6eeab0c%40googlegroups.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/f4f73f7f-e06e-439c-b13e-56b1a6eeab0c%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

hmm what :wink:

MichaOn Mon, May 4, 2015 at 2:33 PM, <@imadgmst> wrote:

hmm

Le lundi 4 mai 2015 03:54:54 UTC+2, upfron...@gmail.com a écrit :

I’m in a situation where I’m trying to integrate my application with
another piece of software. That software only works with java bytecode, so
I’m trying to precompile everything.

For a bit of background, I used the version 4.5 tomcat installer on
windows. I moved my application to c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT\ and it
runs quite nicely.

Next I tried to create a mapping to “/” with
“c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT” as the resource and then assigned the
archive to mapping. I then removed the resource mapping and set the
primary to “archive”, leaving only a path to the .ra file that was created
under c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT\WEB-INF\lucee\context\archives. To test
if the application is using the archive, I renamed a cfm file that is
contained in the archive and tried to access it, but I get a 404. I tried
the same thing with a cfc file and any CreateObject calls to that cfc fails.

Then I tried basically the same thing as above, but instead of mapping to
ROOT, I mapped to a subfolder of root that contains the majority of my
application. Using the same tests as before, cfc files are being found,
however cfm files still return 404.

I’m starting to be convinced that archive mappings are not working as
intended.

After fighting with all that, I would like to take a different approach
that, in theory, would afford me more flexibility as the application
evolves. I would simply like to “touch” every file on deployment such that
.class files are generated in the cfclasses folder.

So my question is, what might be the best way to get make all cfm and cfc
files in my application precompile into the cfclasses folder? Is this even
possible? Do I need to write a batch script that will hit all possible
URLs in my application? I’m worried that if I take that approach, the
security settings I have in my Application.cfc that prevents all except for
a few cfm files to be directly web-accessible will cause problems. That
security makes it so most of my application files must be accessed through
the a controller. The controller will prevent any non-logged-in request
from touching those files.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated. I’ve been banging my head
against this wall for a week now. Thanks!


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
“Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/fb1f7af9-6e73-43bd-a86e-e8c71ae632a8%40googlegroups.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/fb1f7af9-6e73-43bd-a86e-e8c71ae632a8%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Also, how might I go about precompiling to the cfclasses folder instead of
to an archive? Is that even a supported option? Or would I have to come
up with some sort of hacky solution that calls each cfm and cfc as part of
the app initialization?>>>

Thanks, Micha.

If .ra files are incompatible, why does the lucee admin create .ra files
when I go to download an archive from a mapping or assign an archive to a
mapping. I did find it odd that I was getting .ra files from this process
even though the lucee admin is using a .lar file.On Monday, May 4, 2015 at 2:29:10 AM UTC-4, Micha wrote:

“I’m starting to be convinced that archive mappings are not working as
intended.”
Take the Lucee admin as an example (/lucee/admin.cfm) that is an archive
you used to do all this… :wink:
We also have clients that use archives for the complete website, with not
a single cfm file on the server!

You are writing about .ra files, but then also from lucee. Have in mind
that .ra (Railo archive) are not compatible with Lucee, you need .lar files
for Lucee.
The welcome files to not work with archives (depending on the servlet
engine used), best test with the file name (/index.cfm) when you call a
file.
Components only work if you have part of the package as entry point in the
virtual path of the mapping (for compatibility reasons to ACF)
It is best to do component map for your components anyway. In the wiki
you can find some details about this…

Micha

Am Montag, 4. Mai 2015 schrieb :

I’m in a situation where I’m trying to integrate my application with
another piece of software. That software only works with java bytecode, so
I’m trying to precompile everything.

For a bit of background, I used the version 4.5 tomcat installer on
windows. I moved my application to c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT\ and it
runs quite nicely.

Next I tried to create a mapping to “/” with
“c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT” as the resource and then assigned the
archive to mapping. I then removed the resource mapping and set the
primary to “archive”, leaving only a path to the .ra file that was created
under c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT\WEB-INF\lucee\context\archives. To test
if the application is using the archive, I renamed a cfm file that is
contained in the archive and tried to access it, but I get a 404. I tried
the same thing with a cfc file and any CreateObject calls to that cfc fails.

Then I tried basically the same thing as above, but instead of mapping to
ROOT, I mapped to a subfolder of root that contains the majority of my
application. Using the same tests as before, cfc files are being found,
however cfm files still return 404.

I’m starting to be convinced that archive mappings are not working as
intended.

After fighting with all that, I would like to take a different approach
that, in theory, would afford me more flexibility as the application
evolves. I would simply like to “touch” every file on deployment such that
.class files are generated in the cfclasses folder.

So my question is, what might be the best way to get make all cfm and cfc
files in my application precompile into the cfclasses folder? Is this even
possible? Do I need to write a batch script that will hit all possible
URLs in my application? I’m worried that if I take that approach, the
security settings I have in my Application.cfc that prevents all except for
a few cfm files to be directly web-accessible will cause problems. That
security makes it so most of my application files must be accessed through
the a controller. The controller will prevent any non-logged-in request
from touching those files.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated. I’ve been banging my head
against this wall for a week now. Thanks!


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
“Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/b11e74b8-e166-4305-9ad6-46f0c7102799%40googlegroups.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/b11e74b8-e166-4305-9ad6-46f0c7102799%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

I updated to 4.5.1.014 and the admin is now producing .lar files. However,
I am still running into the same issues that I originally explained.

Is there a resource I can read up on?On Monday, May 4, 2015 at 4:31:01 PM UTC-4, upfron...@gmail.com wrote:

I installed this about 1-2 weeks ago from the Apache Tomcat windows
installer found on lucee.org. Here’s a direct link to the file I
downloaded to install from:
http://railo.viviotech.net/downloader.cfm/id/134/file/lucee-4.5.1.000-pl0-windows-installer.exe

So it appears I’m on version 4.5.1. What version should I be using?

On Monday, May 4, 2015 at 3:38:13 PM UTC-4, Micha wrote:

What version do you use, this was a bug in a early version on Lucee 4.5…

Micha

Am Montag, 4. Mai 2015 schrieb :

Thanks, Micha.

If .ra files are incompatible, why does the lucee admin create .ra files
when I go to download an archive from a mapping or assign an archive to a
mapping. I did find it odd that I was getting .ra files from this process
even though the lucee admin is using a .lar file.

On Monday, May 4, 2015 at 2:29:10 AM UTC-4, Micha wrote:

“I’m starting to be convinced that archive mappings are not working as
intended.”
Take the Lucee admin as an example (/lucee/admin.cfm) that is an
archive you used to do all this… :wink:
We also have clients that use archives for the complete website, with
not a single cfm file on the server!

You are writing about .ra files, but then also from lucee. Have in mind
that .ra (Railo archive) are not compatible with Lucee, you need .lar files
for Lucee.
The welcome files to not work with archives (depending on the servlet
engine used), best test with the file name (/index.cfm) when you call a
file.
Components only work if you have part of the package as entry point in
the virtual path of the mapping (for compatibility reasons to ACF)
It is best to do component map for your components anyway. In the wiki
you can find some details about this…

Micha

Am Montag, 4. Mai 2015 schrieb :

I’m in a situation where I’m trying to integrate my application with
another piece of software. That software only works with java bytecode, so
I’m trying to precompile everything.

For a bit of background, I used the version 4.5 tomcat installer on
windows. I moved my application to c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT\ and it
runs quite nicely.

Next I tried to create a mapping to “/” with
“c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT” as the resource and then assigned the
archive to mapping. I then removed the resource mapping and set the
primary to “archive”, leaving only a path to the .ra file that was created
under c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT\WEB-INF\lucee\context\archives. To test
if the application is using the archive, I renamed a cfm file that is
contained in the archive and tried to access it, but I get a 404. I tried
the same thing with a cfc file and any CreateObject calls to that cfc fails.

Then I tried basically the same thing as above, but instead of mapping
to ROOT, I mapped to a subfolder of root that contains the majority of my
application. Using the same tests as before, cfc files are being found,
however cfm files still return 404.

I’m starting to be convinced that archive mappings are not working as
intended.

After fighting with all that, I would like to take a different
approach that, in theory, would afford me more flexibility as the
application evolves. I would simply like to “touch” every file on
deployment such that .class files are generated in the cfclasses folder.

So my question is, what might be the best way to get make all cfm and
cfc files in my application precompile into the cfclasses folder? Is this
even possible? Do I need to write a batch script that will hit all
possible URLs in my application? I’m worried that if I take that approach,
the security settings I have in my Application.cfc that prevents all except
for a few cfm files to be directly web-accessible will cause problems.
That security makes it so most of my application files must be accessed
through the a controller. The controller will prevent any non-logged-in
request from touching those files.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated. I’ve been banging my head
against this wall for a week now. Thanks!


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups “Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/b11e74b8-e166-4305-9ad6-46f0c7102799%40googlegroups.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/b11e74b8-e166-4305-9ad6-46f0c7102799%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups “Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/f4f73f7f-e06e-439c-b13e-56b1a6eeab0c%40googlegroups.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/f4f73f7f-e06e-439c-b13e-56b1a6eeab0c%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

For anyone interested and equally nooby as me…

As an update, I never managed to get archives working as I would expect.
To clarify, I expect once I define a mapping to an archive, then any
requests made to templates/components compiled in the archive will be
“pulled” from the archive. Instead, I receive “not found” type errors when
I try to access a template/component that resides in the mapped archive but
has been removed from its original location. Perhaps I have wrong
expectations.

Anyhow, I found a different solution which would have been fine from the
beginning had it not eluded me. What I have done is create a mapping to
“/” from my app’s root folder. I then simply Compile that mapping (either
from the Lucee admin or from a cfadmin tag). What eluded me was where the
.class files were being created. I figured they would go in to the
cfclasses folder under WEB-INF of my application. Instead they are being
created in c:\lucee\lib\lucee-server\context\cfclasses. Then it just
became a matter of copying those class files to the appropriate location
under my app’s WEB-INF. Admittedly, I only do this copy because I don’t
know which .class files are executed at runtime, so as long as I have them
in both places, I don’t care. My whole goal was to simply have the app
precompiled so an external application can scan the application for all
java binaries.On Tuesday, May 5, 2015 at 9:50:47 AM UTC-4, upfron...@gmail.com wrote:

I updated to 4.5.1.014 and the admin is now producing .lar files.
However, I am still running into the same issues that I originally
explained.

Is there a resource I can read up on?

On Monday, May 4, 2015 at 4:31:01 PM UTC-4, upfron...@gmail.com wrote:

I installed this about 1-2 weeks ago from the Apache Tomcat windows
installer found on lucee.org. Here’s a direct link to the file I
downloaded to install from:
http://railo.viviotech.net/downloader.cfm/id/134/file/lucee-4.5.1.000-pl0-windows-installer.exe

So it appears I’m on version 4.5.1. What version should I be using?

On Monday, May 4, 2015 at 3:38:13 PM UTC-4, Micha wrote:

What version do you use, this was a bug in a early version on Lucee
4.5…

Micha

Am Montag, 4. Mai 2015 schrieb :

Thanks, Micha.

If .ra files are incompatible, why does the lucee admin create .ra
files when I go to download an archive from a mapping or assign an archive
to a mapping. I did find it odd that I was getting .ra files from this
process even though the lucee admin is using a .lar file.

On Monday, May 4, 2015 at 2:29:10 AM UTC-4, Micha wrote:

“I’m starting to be convinced that archive mappings are not working
as intended.”
Take the Lucee admin as an example (/lucee/admin.cfm) that is an
archive you used to do all this… :wink:
We also have clients that use archives for the complete website, with
not a single cfm file on the server!

You are writing about .ra files, but then also from lucee. Have in
mind that .ra (Railo archive) are not compatible with Lucee, you need .lar
files for Lucee.
The welcome files to not work with archives (depending on the servlet
engine used), best test with the file name (/index.cfm) when you call a
file.
Components only work if you have part of the package as entry point in
the virtual path of the mapping (for compatibility reasons to ACF)
It is best to do component map for your components anyway. In the
wiki you can find some details about this…

Micha

Am Montag, 4. Mai 2015 schrieb :

I’m in a situation where I’m trying to integrate my application with
another piece of software. That software only works with java bytecode, so
I’m trying to precompile everything.

For a bit of background, I used the version 4.5 tomcat installer on
windows. I moved my application to c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT\ and it
runs quite nicely.

Next I tried to create a mapping to “/” with
“c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT” as the resource and then assigned the
archive to mapping. I then removed the resource mapping and set the
primary to “archive”, leaving only a path to the .ra file that was created
under c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT\WEB-INF\lucee\context\archives. To test
if the application is using the archive, I renamed a cfm file that is
contained in the archive and tried to access it, but I get a 404. I tried
the same thing with a cfc file and any CreateObject calls to that cfc fails.

Then I tried basically the same thing as above, but instead of
mapping to ROOT, I mapped to a subfolder of root that contains the majority
of my application. Using the same tests as before, cfc files are being
found, however cfm files still return 404.

I’m starting to be convinced that archive mappings are not working as
intended.

After fighting with all that, I would like to take a different
approach that, in theory, would afford me more flexibility as the
application evolves. I would simply like to “touch” every file on
deployment such that .class files are generated in the cfclasses folder.

So my question is, what might be the best way to get make all cfm and
cfc files in my application precompile into the cfclasses folder? Is this
even possible? Do I need to write a batch script that will hit all
possible URLs in my application? I’m worried that if I take that approach,
the security settings I have in my Application.cfc that prevents all except
for a few cfm files to be directly web-accessible will cause problems.
That security makes it so most of my application files must be accessed
through the a controller. The controller will prevent any non-logged-in
request from touching those files.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated. I’ve been banging my head
against this wall for a week now. Thanks!


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups “Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/b11e74b8-e166-4305-9ad6-46f0c7102799%40googlegroups.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/b11e74b8-e166-4305-9ad6-46f0c7102799%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups “Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/f4f73f7f-e06e-439c-b13e-56b1a6eeab0c%40googlegroups.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/f4f73f7f-e06e-439c-b13e-56b1a6eeab0c%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Thanks for offering to test out my archive, but I don’t think that’s
necessary. Using the archives was only a work-around to what I was
originally trying to do (which is to precompile the application). I’m not
even really concerned about a sourceless distribution. This is probably an
uncommon edge case, but we intend to integrate with external software that
will turn our application from single to multi-tenant. Their product will
scan our application for java binaries and map injection points which is
why I needed all of the class files to be created ahead of time instead of
JIT.

So yeah, really I was just being boneheaded and couldn’t find where the
precompiled classes were being stored. Had I know that from the beginning,
I wouldn’t have even bothered with the archive.

Perhaps you can clarify something for me, though. It seems that despite
precompiling the application, class files still build up under the app’s
WEB-INF folder. So when it comes time to actually execute a class, which
class files are being invoked? Is it the class files in the app’s WEB-INF?
Or is it the class files in /lucee/lib/lucee-server/context/cfclasses/?On Friday, May 8, 2015 at 2:45:02 AM UTC-4, Micha wrote:

Like I said we use that functionality in many places including your Lucee
admin. If you give me your archive (off list) I can even test it if you
like…

You can btw also take the code from the cfclasses directory and replace
your source code with the classes files, so for example you have a app with
one file named test.cfm, take the test class from the cfclasses directory,
rename it to test.cfm and replace it with the source file. Lucee will
recognize that the .cfm file contains a class binary and uses that directly.
There was even an extension for Railo to do this, this was a 3th party
extension and I have no clue it is migrated to Lucee or not, but I can find
out if you are interested.

Micha

On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 9:01 PM, <@upfronthippo> wrote:

For anyone interested and equally nooby as me…

As an update, I never managed to get archives working as I would expect.
To clarify, I expect once I define a mapping to an archive, then any
requests made to templates/components compiled in the archive will be
“pulled” from the archive. Instead, I receive “not found” type errors when
I try to access a template/component that resides in the mapped archive but
has been removed from its original location. Perhaps I have wrong
expectations.

Anyhow, I found a different solution which would have been fine from the
beginning had it not eluded me. What I have done is create a mapping to
“/” from my app’s root folder. I then simply Compile that mapping (either
from the Lucee admin or from a cfadmin tag). What eluded me was where the
.class files were being created. I figured they would go in to the
cfclasses folder under WEB-INF of my application. Instead they are being
created in c:\lucee\lib\lucee-server\context\cfclasses. Then it just
became a matter of copying those class files to the appropriate location
under my app’s WEB-INF. Admittedly, I only do this copy because I don’t
know which .class files are executed at runtime, so as long as I have them
in both places, I don’t care. My whole goal was to simply have the app
precompiled so an external application can scan the application for all
java binaries.

On Tuesday, May 5, 2015 at 9:50:47 AM UTC-4, upfron...@gmail.com wrote:

I updated to 4.5.1.014 and the admin is now producing .lar files.
However, I am still running into the same issues that I originally
explained.

Is there a resource I can read up on?

On Monday, May 4, 2015 at 4:31:01 PM UTC-4, upfron...@gmail.com wrote:

I installed this about 1-2 weeks ago from the Apache Tomcat windows
installer found on lucee.org. Here’s a direct link to the file I
downloaded to install from:
http://railo.viviotech.net/downloader.cfm/id/134/file/lucee-4.5.1.000-pl0-windows-installer.exe

So it appears I’m on version 4.5.1. What version should I be using?

On Monday, May 4, 2015 at 3:38:13 PM UTC-4, Micha wrote:

What version do you use, this was a bug in a early version on Lucee
4.5…

Micha

Am Montag, 4. Mai 2015 schrieb :

Thanks, Micha.

If .ra files are incompatible, why does the lucee admin create .ra
files when I go to download an archive from a mapping or assign an archive
to a mapping. I did find it odd that I was getting .ra files from this
process even though the lucee admin is using a .lar file.

On Monday, May 4, 2015 at 2:29:10 AM UTC-4, Micha wrote:

“I’m starting to be convinced that archive mappings are not working
as intended.”
Take the Lucee admin as an example (/lucee/admin.cfm) that is an
archive you used to do all this… :wink:
We also have clients that use archives for the complete website,
with not a single cfm file on the server!

You are writing about .ra files, but then also from lucee. Have in
mind that .ra (Railo archive) are not compatible with Lucee, you need .lar
files for Lucee.
The welcome files to not work with archives (depending on the
servlet engine used), best test with the file name (/index.cfm) when you
call a file.
Components only work if you have part of the package as entry point
in the virtual path of the mapping (for compatibility reasons to ACF)
It is best to do component map for your components anyway. In the
wiki you can find some details about this…

Micha

Am Montag, 4. Mai 2015 schrieb :

I’m in a situation where I’m trying to integrate my application
with another piece of software. That software only works with java
bytecode, so I’m trying to precompile everything.

For a bit of background, I used the version 4.5 tomcat installer on
windows. I moved my application to c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT\ and it
runs quite nicely.

Next I tried to create a mapping to “/” with
“c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT” as the resource and then assigned the
archive to mapping. I then removed the resource mapping and set the
primary to “archive”, leaving only a path to the .ra file that was created
under c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT\WEB-INF\lucee\context\archives. To test
if the application is using the archive, I renamed a cfm file that is
contained in the archive and tried to access it, but I get a 404. I tried
the same thing with a cfc file and any CreateObject calls to that cfc fails.

Then I tried basically the same thing as above, but instead of
mapping to ROOT, I mapped to a subfolder of root that contains the majority
of my application. Using the same tests as before, cfc files are being
found, however cfm files still return 404.

I’m starting to be convinced that archive mappings are not working
as intended.

After fighting with all that, I would like to take a different
approach that, in theory, would afford me more flexibility as the
application evolves. I would simply like to “touch” every file on
deployment such that .class files are generated in the cfclasses folder.

So my question is, what might be the best way to get make all cfm
and cfc files in my application precompile into the cfclasses folder? Is
this even possible? Do I need to write a batch script that will hit all
possible URLs in my application? I’m worried that if I take that approach,
the security settings I have in my Application.cfc that prevents all except
for a few cfm files to be directly web-accessible will cause problems.
That security makes it so most of my application files must be accessed
through the a controller. The controller will prevent any non-logged-in
request from touching those files.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated. I’ve been banging my head
against this wall for a week now. Thanks!


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups “Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/b11e74b8-e166-4305-9ad6-46f0c7102799%40googlegroups.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/b11e74b8-e166-4305-9ad6-46f0c7102799%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups “Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/f4f73f7f-e06e-439c-b13e-56b1a6eeab0c%40googlegroups.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/f4f73f7f-e06e-439c-b13e-56b1a6eeab0c%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
“Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/a18369ff-43ee-46a1-b909-7cb2738ac163%40googlegroups.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/a18369ff-43ee-46a1-b909-7cb2738ac163%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Always in the web context (web-inf)

Micha

Am Freitag, 8. Mai 2015 schrieb :> Thanks for offering to test out my archive, but I don’t think that’s

necessary. Using the archives was only a work-around to what I was
originally trying to do (which is to precompile the application). I’m not
even really concerned about a sourceless distribution. This is probably an
uncommon edge case, but we intend to integrate with external software that
will turn our application from single to multi-tenant. Their product will
scan our application for java binaries and map injection points which is
why I needed all of the class files to be created ahead of time instead of
JIT.

So yeah, really I was just being boneheaded and couldn’t find where the
precompiled classes were being stored. Had I know that from the beginning,
I wouldn’t have even bothered with the archive.

Perhaps you can clarify something for me, though. It seems that despite
precompiling the application, class files still build up under the app’s
WEB-INF folder. So when it comes time to actually execute a class, which
class files are being invoked? Is it the class files in the app’s
WEB-INF? Or is it the class files in
/lucee/lib/lucee-server/context/cfclasses/?

On Friday, May 8, 2015 at 2:45:02 AM UTC-4, Micha wrote:

Like I said we use that functionality in many places including your Lucee
admin. If you give me your archive (off list) I can even test it if you
like…

You can btw also take the code from the cfclasses directory and replace
your source code with the classes files, so for example you have a app with
one file named test.cfm, take the test class from the cfclasses directory,
rename it to test.cfm and replace it with the source file. Lucee will
recognize that the .cfm file contains a class binary and uses that directly.
There was even an extension for Railo to do this, this was a 3th party
extension and I have no clue it is migrated to Lucee or not, but I can find
out if you are interested.

Micha

On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 9:01 PM, <@upfronthippo> wrote:

For anyone interested and equally nooby as me…

As an update, I never managed to get archives working as I would
expect. To clarify, I expect once I define a mapping to an archive, then
any requests made to templates/components compiled in the archive will be
“pulled” from the archive. Instead, I receive “not found” type errors when
I try to access a template/component that resides in the mapped archive but
has been removed from its original location. Perhaps I have wrong
expectations.

Anyhow, I found a different solution which would have been fine from the
beginning had it not eluded me. What I have done is create a mapping to
“/” from my app’s root folder. I then simply Compile that mapping (either
from the Lucee admin or from a cfadmin tag). What eluded me was where the
.class files were being created. I figured they would go in to the
cfclasses folder under WEB-INF of my application. Instead they are being
created in c:\lucee\lib\lucee-server\context\cfclasses. Then it just
became a matter of copying those class files to the appropriate location
under my app’s WEB-INF. Admittedly, I only do this copy because I don’t
know which .class files are executed at runtime, so as long as I have them
in both places, I don’t care. My whole goal was to simply have the app
precompiled so an external application can scan the application for all
java binaries.

On Tuesday, May 5, 2015 at 9:50:47 AM UTC-4, upfron...@gmail.com wrote:

I updated to 4.5.1.014 and the admin is now producing .lar files.
However, I am still running into the same issues that I originally
explained.

Is there a resource I can read up on?

On Monday, May 4, 2015 at 4:31:01 PM UTC-4, upfron...@gmail.com wrote:

I installed this about 1-2 weeks ago from the Apache Tomcat windows
installer found on lucee.org. Here’s a direct link to the file I
downloaded to install from:
http://railo.viviotech.net/downloader.cfm/id/134/file/lucee-4.5.1.000-pl0-windows-installer.exe

So it appears I’m on version 4.5.1. What version should I be using?

On Monday, May 4, 2015 at 3:38:13 PM UTC-4, Micha wrote:

What version do you use, this was a bug in a early version on Lucee
4.5…

Micha

Am Montag, 4. Mai 2015 schrieb :

Thanks, Micha.

If .ra files are incompatible, why does the lucee admin create .ra
files when I go to download an archive from a mapping or assign an archive
to a mapping. I did find it odd that I was getting .ra files from this
process even though the lucee admin is using a .lar file.

On Monday, May 4, 2015 at 2:29:10 AM UTC-4, Micha wrote:

“I’m starting to be convinced that archive mappings are not
working as intended.”
Take the Lucee admin as an example (/lucee/admin.cfm) that is an
archive you used to do all this… :wink:
We also have clients that use archives for the complete website,
with not a single cfm file on the server!

You are writing about .ra files, but then also from lucee. Have in
mind that .ra (Railo archive) are not compatible with Lucee, you need .lar
files for Lucee.
The welcome files to not work with archives (depending on the
servlet engine used), best test with the file name (/index.cfm) when you
call a file.
Components only work if you have part of the package as entry point
in the virtual path of the mapping (for compatibility reasons to ACF)
It is best to do component map for your components anyway. In the
wiki you can find some details about this…

Micha

Am Montag, 4. Mai 2015 schrieb :

I’m in a situation where I’m trying to integrate my application
with another piece of software. That software only works with java
bytecode, so I’m trying to precompile everything.

For a bit of background, I used the version 4.5 tomcat installer
on windows. I moved my application to c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT\ and it
runs quite nicely.

Next I tried to create a mapping to “/” with
“c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT” as the resource and then assigned the
archive to mapping. I then removed the resource mapping and set the
primary to “archive”, leaving only a path to the .ra file that was created
under c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT\WEB-INF\lucee\context\archives. To test
if the application is using the archive, I renamed a cfm file that is
contained in the archive and tried to access it, but I get a 404. I tried
the same thing with a cfc file and any CreateObject calls to that cfc fails.

Then I tried basically the same thing as above, but instead of
mapping to ROOT, I mapped to a subfolder of root that contains the majority
of my application. Using the same tests as before, cfc files are being
found, however cfm files still return 404.

I’m starting to be convinced that archive mappings are not working
as intended.

After fighting with all that, I would like to take a different
approach that, in theory, would afford me more flexibility as the
application evolves. I would simply like to “touch” every file on
deployment such that .class files are generated in the cfclasses folder.

So my question is, what might be the best way to get make all cfm
and cfc files in my application precompile into the cfclasses folder? Is
this even possible? Do I need to write a batch script that will hit all
possible URLs in my application? I’m worried that if I take that approach,
the security settings I have in my Application.cfc that prevents all except
for a few cfm files to be directly web-accessible will cause problems.
That security makes it so most of my application files must be accessed
through the a controller. The controller will prevent any non-logged-in
request from touching those files.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated. I’ve been banging my
head against this wall for a week now. Thanks!


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups “Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/b11e74b8-e166-4305-9ad6-46f0c7102799%40googlegroups.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/b11e74b8-e166-4305-9ad6-46f0c7102799%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups “Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/f4f73f7f-e06e-439c-b13e-56b1a6eeab0c%40googlegroups.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/f4f73f7f-e06e-439c-b13e-56b1a6eeab0c%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups “Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/a18369ff-43ee-46a1-b909-7cb2738ac163%40googlegroups.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/a18369ff-43ee-46a1-b909-7cb2738ac163%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
“Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,‘cvml’,‘lucee%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com’);>.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,‘cvml’,‘lucee@googlegroups.com’);>.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/e254baf6-26a1-4eba-83da-8fa309d2d13d%40googlegroups.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/e254baf6-26a1-4eba-83da-8fa309d2d13d%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Like I said we use that functionality in many places including your Lucee
admin. If you give me your archive (off list) I can even test it if you
like…

You can btw also take the code from the cfclasses directory and replace
your source code with the classes files, so for example you have a app with
one file named test.cfm, take the test class from the cfclasses directory,
rename it to test.cfm and replace it with the source file. Lucee will
recognize that the .cfm file contains a class binary and uses that directly.
There was even an extension for Railo to do this, this was a 3th party
extension and I have no clue it is migrated to Lucee or not, but I can find
out if you are interested.

MichaOn Thu, May 7, 2015 at 9:01 PM, <@upfronthippo <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,‘cvml’,’@upfronthippo’);>> wrote:

For anyone interested and equally nooby as me…

As an update, I never managed to get archives working as I would expect.
To clarify, I expect once I define a mapping to an archive, then any
requests made to templates/components compiled in the archive will be
“pulled” from the archive. Instead, I receive “not found” type errors when
I try to access a template/component that resides in the mapped archive but
has been removed from its original location. Perhaps I have wrong
expectations.

Anyhow, I found a different solution which would have been fine from the
beginning had it not eluded me. What I have done is create a mapping to
“/” from my app’s root folder. I then simply Compile that mapping (either
from the Lucee admin or from a cfadmin tag). What eluded me was where the
.class files were being created. I figured they would go in to the
cfclasses folder under WEB-INF of my application. Instead they are being
created in c:\lucee\lib\lucee-server\context\cfclasses. Then it just
became a matter of copying those class files to the appropriate location
under my app’s WEB-INF. Admittedly, I only do this copy because I don’t
know which .class files are executed at runtime, so as long as I have them
in both places, I don’t care. My whole goal was to simply have the app
precompiled so an external application can scan the application for all
java binaries.

On Tuesday, May 5, 2015 at 9:50:47 AM UTC-4, upfron...@gmail.com <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,‘cvml’,‘upfron…@gmail.com’);> wrote:

I updated to 4.5.1.014 and the admin is now producing .lar files.
However, I am still running into the same issues that I originally
explained.

Is there a resource I can read up on?

On Monday, May 4, 2015 at 4:31:01 PM UTC-4, upfron...@gmail.com wrote:

I installed this about 1-2 weeks ago from the Apache Tomcat windows
installer found on lucee.org. Here’s a direct link to the file I
downloaded to install from:
http://railo.viviotech.net/downloader.cfm/id/134/file/lucee-4.5.1.000-pl0-windows-installer.exe

So it appears I’m on version 4.5.1. What version should I be using?

On Monday, May 4, 2015 at 3:38:13 PM UTC-4, Micha wrote:

What version do you use, this was a bug in a early version on Lucee
4.5…

Micha

Am Montag, 4. Mai 2015 schrieb :

Thanks, Micha.

If .ra files are incompatible, why does the lucee admin create .ra
files when I go to download an archive from a mapping or assign an archive
to a mapping. I did find it odd that I was getting .ra files from this
process even though the lucee admin is using a .lar file.

On Monday, May 4, 2015 at 2:29:10 AM UTC-4, Micha wrote:

“I’m starting to be convinced that archive mappings are not working
as intended.”
Take the Lucee admin as an example (/lucee/admin.cfm) that is an
archive you used to do all this… :wink:
We also have clients that use archives for the complete website, with
not a single cfm file on the server!

You are writing about .ra files, but then also from lucee. Have in
mind that .ra (Railo archive) are not compatible with Lucee, you need .lar
files for Lucee.
The welcome files to not work with archives (depending on the servlet
engine used), best test with the file name (/index.cfm) when you call a
file.
Components only work if you have part of the package as entry point
in the virtual path of the mapping (for compatibility reasons to ACF)
It is best to do component map for your components anyway. In the
wiki you can find some details about this…

Micha

Am Montag, 4. Mai 2015 schrieb :

I’m in a situation where I’m trying to integrate my application with
another piece of software. That software only works with java bytecode, so
I’m trying to precompile everything.

For a bit of background, I used the version 4.5 tomcat installer on
windows. I moved my application to c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT\ and it
runs quite nicely.

Next I tried to create a mapping to “/” with
“c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT” as the resource and then assigned the
archive to mapping. I then removed the resource mapping and set the
primary to “archive”, leaving only a path to the .ra file that was created
under c:\lucee\tomcat\webapps\ROOT\WEB-INF\lucee\context\archives. To test
if the application is using the archive, I renamed a cfm file that is
contained in the archive and tried to access it, but I get a 404. I tried
the same thing with a cfc file and any CreateObject calls to that cfc fails.

Then I tried basically the same thing as above, but instead of
mapping to ROOT, I mapped to a subfolder of root that contains the majority
of my application. Using the same tests as before, cfc files are being
found, however cfm files still return 404.

I’m starting to be convinced that archive mappings are not working
as intended.

After fighting with all that, I would like to take a different
approach that, in theory, would afford me more flexibility as the
application evolves. I would simply like to “touch” every file on
deployment such that .class files are generated in the cfclasses folder.

So my question is, what might be the best way to get make all cfm
and cfc files in my application precompile into the cfclasses folder? Is
this even possible? Do I need to write a batch script that will hit all
possible URLs in my application? I’m worried that if I take that approach,
the security settings I have in my Application.cfc that prevents all except
for a few cfm files to be directly web-accessible will cause problems.
That security makes it so most of my application files must be accessed
through the a controller. The controller will prevent any non-logged-in
request from touching those files.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated. I’ve been banging my head
against this wall for a week now. Thanks!


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups “Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/b11e74b8-e166-4305-9ad6-46f0c7102799%40googlegroups.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/b11e74b8-e166-4305-9ad6-46f0c7102799%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups “Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/f4f73f7f-e06e-439c-b13e-56b1a6eeab0c%40googlegroups.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/f4f73f7f-e06e-439c-b13e-56b1a6eeab0c%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
“Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,‘cvml’,‘lucee%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com’);>.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,‘cvml’,‘lucee@googlegroups.com’);>.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/a18369ff-43ee-46a1-b909-7cb2738ac163%40googlegroups.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/a18369ff-43ee-46a1-b909-7cb2738ac163%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.