My application developped and running very well on Glassfish 3.1.2 is not easy to migrate to WebSphere 8.0.2!
Replacing Mojarra with MyFaces is the smaller issue. Problems start with the fileupload component. com.sun.faces.renderkit.... is not available!
Trinidad should save the situation, but:
The proposed solution with:
doesn't work, it uses com.sun....
The next solution found on the net neither works:
The class defined under <param-value> simply does not exist within the trinidad-impl-2.0.1.jar!
So, by searching I found within com.ibm.ws.jsf.myfaces.jar the class org.apache.myfaces.view.facelets.FaceletViewHandler. This seams to be a first step as with this change, at least the application can be deployed on WAS8 and starts. But the FACELETS_VIEW_MAPPINGS from *.xhtml to *.jsf still fails! A file xxxx.xhtml.jsf is searched and of course not found!
Hwo can bring me on track to solve this problem with WAS8? Would be very kind.
Pinned topic JSF2 migration of Mojarra based Application Fileupload as obstacle
Answered question This question has been answered.
Unanswered question This question has not been answered yet.
Updated on 2013-03-21T07:14:02Z at 2013-03-21T07:14:02Z by b69
bpulito 0600015YGA23 Posts
Re: JSF2 migration of Mojarra based Application Fileupload as obstacle2012-03-22T16:49:09ZThis is the accepted answer. This is the accepted answer.This is not a SIP or CEA related issue and is posted to the wrong forum. Not sure where you should go with this but I would look for a more general purpose WAS forum. Here is a good place to start:
Re: JSF2 migration of Mojarra based Application Fileupload as obstacle2012-06-07T05:19:41ZThis is the accepted answer. This is the accepted answer.
- bpulito 0600015YGA
I respected your answer, but digging deeper meanwhile, it turned out this forum being the only place to post this kind of questions closely related to WAS. Besides, the link to this forum is coming from the WebSphere Site, especially from the WAS for Developers part! So, your answer was really NOT helpful.
The origin of the problem was related to an issue with 22.214.171.124 and could be resolved by updating to 126.96.36.199.