DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33564>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33564 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-15 18:21 ------- That's not surprising (to us at least), because a <servlet> tag is nice by itself but doesn't mean anything, seeing as how it's never used because it doesn't match any URL-pattern. So your JSP page still matches the JSPServlet because of its *.jsp mapping. This is what the initial responses to this issue (the ones dismissed as "shooting from the hip" ;)) meant. You have a couple of options, by the way. You can precisely map your "servlet." You can customize Tomcat's JSPServlet (or a copy of it) to fit your needs. You can use application-level parameters, the ones that go under the <web-app> element in web.xml and not in a <servlet> tag. You can use resource or env-entry references to accomplish these same things. Pretty much any of these are better than the approach of declaring a <servlet> tag for a JSP page. And of course, none of these are a Tomcat bug, and the initial responses (although possibly curt, or simply expecting a high level of knowledge from the reader) were right on. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
