This question already has an answer here:
What is the use of faces-config.xml in JSF 2?
(1 answer)
Closed 4 years ago.
I have been studying JavaEE8 and practicing with some projects, understanding the new technologies like Servlet 4.0 and JSF 2.3. I have read in many forums and pages, in some I see that they say that web.xml and faces-config.xml are not necessary, because annotations are now used, but in some others they continue to use them.
In which cases should you continue to use the Web Deployment Descriptor-> web.xml and the application configuration resource file-> faces-config.xml?
They aren't required, but I'd highly recommend to use them since you'll need them sooner or later for additional configuration anyways.
The annotations are used to achieve better readability and to simplify the faces-config.xml and web.xml, however they do not even nearly allow for the configuration options that can be made in the configuration files.
For example you can use the #FacesValidator Annotation instead of declaring and referencing the corresponding class in the faces-config.xml.
A task that can't be achieved by using annotations would be the declaratation of a welcome page. If you want to specify it, you need the web.xml.
I found a specific problem in the Mojarra implementation of JSF 2.3 when using the web.xml or faces-config.xml file. In the code of this implementation, the ELUtils class has the following condition:
if (getFacesConfigXmlVersion(facesContext).equals("2.3") || getWebXmlVersion(facesContext).equals("4.0")) {
throw new FacesException("Unable to find CDI BeanManager");
}
which throws an exception: "Unable to find CID BeanManager". I only had the faces-config.xml file with the latest version of JSF specified in the namespace and I was throwing that exception.
To avoid this problem, you can specify a different version of JSF (before 2.3) in the faces-config.xml file and specify a different version of the web.xml file (before 4.0), or simply do not add any of these configuration files. In my case, I removed the faces-config.xml and ran the application without problems.
I hope that the implementation of Mojarra will solve that little detail.
Related
This question already has an answer here:
EL proposals / autocomplete / code assist in Facelets with Eclipse
(1 answer)
Closed 5 years ago.
You are analyzing the Facelets code of a very large JSF web application written by others (e.g. during a production incident) and you want to find the bean class that is implementing a bean, knowing its name as it comes in EL expression.
You didn't write it and the bean's name does not match any Java class in the project.
You can't assume that the class is annotated.
While there are several methods to reach to the same result, I hope this question can document the best practices to solve this problem.
NOTE: This question is not about how to enable an IDE option to do so, it is about how to deal with it, without IDE support. I have made many searches and haven't found this question in StackOverflow, in the terms expressed here.
Print it!
(-) Requires to redeploy.
Edit the XHTML file to write out the class' name
<!-- #{msg.getClass().getSimpleName()} -->
Redeploy the modified XHTML file
Reload the page
Look for Annotations
(-) Not always works
Search for the annotation ("#ManagedBean") across the workspace and find the annotation.
Look in Face-Config
Search in faces-config.xml (e.g. ResourceBundles)
IDE Support
E.g. Eclipse with JBoss Tools
EL proposals / autocomplete / code assist in Facelets with Eclipse
I am experiencing a problem with a composite component. I'm not quite sure if it's a bug in one of the used libraries or just my own ignorance of the matter. If I put the component bar.xhtml files in
WebContent/resources/foo/bar.xhtml
everything is working as intended. But if I put them in
WebContent/resources/subfolder/foo/bar.xhtml
they are just not displayed, and I get the message:
The page /login.xhtml declares namespace http://java.sun.com/jsf/composite/subfolder/foo and uses the tag foo:bar , but no TagLibrary associated to namespace.
I suspect it has something to do with the unmapped resource handler from Omnifaces, and is maybe just a parameter I'm not able to figure out. Maybe someone can give me a hint here?
I'm using (amongst others):
Apache MyFaces 2.2.4
Omnifaces 1.8.1
Primefaces 5.0
Tomcat 8.0.12
Edit 2
Moved the answer to a reply
Ok - after sleeping one night over it, I found out that this had nothing to with Omnifaces, but with a change in MyFaces since 2.1.6. Since then, you have to put the following in your web.xml:
<context-param>
<param-name>org.apache.myfaces.STRICT_JSF_2_ALLOW_SLASH_LIBRARY_NAME</param-name>
<param-value>true</param-value>
</context-param>
(found here )
when using CombinedResourceHandler in a Richfaces application only stylesheets and user defiend scripts are combined. The standard JavaScript resource and all Richfaces specific resources remain as seperated resources.
The Omnifaces documentation states:
RichFaces has the same problem with several JS files, but this is so far not exactly trivial to workaround
So my question is what this 'non-trivial workaround' would be?
As far as I can see, CombinedResourceHandler wont handle resources when getRendererType() returns org.richfaces.renderkit.ResourceLibraryRenderer. These are then handled by org.richfaces.renderkit.html.ResourceLibraryRenderer.
I am not sure what would be the best way to combine RichFaces behaviour with OmniFaces here.
I was able to create a solution by modifying OmniFaces CombinedResourceHandler.
Details in short:
Richfaces utilizes a concept called ResourceLibrarys wich means a resource may not only be a single file but instead a collection of those files. For example, RichFaces uses a resource named base-component.reslib. RichFaces ResourceHandler interpretes this resource dependency as dependency to
javax.faces:jsf.js
jquery.js
richfaces.js
richfaces-base-component.js
So the CombinedResourceHandler needed some extra functionality to seperate dependencies to ordinary Resources from Richfaces ResourceLibraries. The latter needed to be resolved according to specifications obtained from RichFaces sources.
It was not trivial to work this around without modifying the CombinedResourceHandler itself. The CombinedResourceHandler itself has really to be modified to use a reflection hack which extracts the resources from RichFaces' org.richfaces.resource.ResourceLibraryFactoryImpl. The reflection hack is necessary in order to keep OmniFaces free of RichFaces dependencies so that it can be used together with other component libraries like PrimeFaces.
As per issue 107, this was implemented in 1.3-20121206.
Can anyone tell me if it is possible to keep managed beans in separate .xsp-config configuration files?
And if yes than how to do this? I have tried and it only worked if I put them into faces-config.xml file.
If you want to split your bean definitions into multiple configuration files, you'll need to create an OSGi plugin. XSP libraries can contain more than one faces-config file (and you can name them whatever you want, because you specify in the library class which XML files contain faces-config definitions). But in an NSF, you're limited to just the auto-generated faces-config.xml file.
Yes, Managed beans must be defined in the faces-config.xml file.
For a good reference on all the different options within faces-config and xsp-config take a look at this website. It describes the format of pretty much everything you might ever want to add to a faces-config or xsp-config and a brief description of the options.
As far as I know they have to be in the faces-config.xml
faces-config is a JSF implementation, you should check out the JSF specification for this, there are even some good post in this forum like this one:
JSF faces config file outside WEB-INF?
I got this error when I upgraded from primefaces 3.0.M3 to 3.0.M4-SNAPSHOT
#60,114 Parent is not of type ActionSource, type is: javax.faces.component.html.HtmlForm#1d9c3e7
I understand that it is happening in other libraries like icefaces too, but I couldn't figure out how to fix it. Any help is appreciated.
The PrimeFaces tags/components are not been parsed at all and thus treated as plain HTML which caused that the real closest parent JSF component is a <h:form>.
This can have at least 2 causes:
You didn't update the taglib namespace URI from http://primefaces.prime.com.tr/ui to the new namespace http://primefaces.org/ui which was introduced in M4.
The PrimeFaces 3.0 M4 JAR file isn't in the webapp's runtime classpath. Verify if this is done right. This is to be achieved by dropping the JAR in /WEB-INF/lib, or if it's been dropped elsewhere, by including it in Deployment Assembly list in project's properties (assuming that you're using Eclipse).