1 Reply Latest reply on Jan 28, 2004 6:17 PM by sj_bennett

    Start/Shutdown JBoss 3.2.3 on WinXP

    jdcasey
    jdcasey Jan 28, 2004 2:37 PM

       

      "jdcasey" wrote:
      I installed JBoss 3.2.3 and out-of-the-box tried to start/stop/restart it. This failed. It happened like this:

      - Ran run.bat; Started up; everything went perfectly
      - Hit CTRL-C to shutdown; Got the message that shutdown was complete
      - Ran run.bat; During startup, got multiple JVM_Bind exceptions, saying that something else out there was bound to the default ports for web, RMI, JNDI, etc.

      NOTE: Default config has the server binding to 0.0.0.0, which I suppose is industry standard...

      NOTE: I repeated this experiment after rebooting my computer, only the second time I used the shutdown.bat script from another command shell...with the same result.


      The Fix (for me):

      I modified the run.bat script (for my convenience) to always supply the following command:

      "%JAVA%" %JAVA_OPTS% -classpath "%JBOSS_CLASSPATH%" \
      org.jboss.Main \
      -b 127.0.0.1 \
      -Djava.rmi.server.hostname=127.0.0.1 \
      %*

      (NOTE for non-*nix users: the backslashes aren't real; they just signify a line break for visualization purposes)

      This made the server bind only to 127.0.0.1 instead of 0.0.0.0, which allowed me to use:

      shutdown.bat -s 127.0.0.1

      This worked perfectly, and restarts are no longer a problem. I will probably modify my shutdown.bat file to reflect the same convenience changes I made in run.bat...

      I wanted to log this to make sure a record existed that the out-of-the-box installation of JBoss on WinXP _did_not_work_. The shutdown process never properly relinquishes control of various ports (I have no idea how the developers managed that one; I didn't know it was possible!). Only by configuring it to bind to a specific IP address did I workaround this problem.

      Perhaps the release notes should make note of this, or some type of warning should be put in place?


      • 3725 Views
      • Tags: