🎄 Happy Holidays! 🥳

Most of Solace is closed December 24–January 1 so our employees can spend time with their families. We will re-open Thursday, January 2, 2024. Please expect slower response times during this period and open a support ticket for anything needing immediate assistance.

Happy Holidays!

Please note: most of Solace is closed December 25–January 2, and will re-open Tuesday, January 3, 2023.

JavaRTO solclientj-native-common runtime dependencies (version 10.2.0)

Hi team,

Please can I ask for some guidance with respect to handling runtime dependencies of the solclientj-native-common.jar present in version 10.2.0 of the API in the context of gradle builds - I am fairly new to gradle. For example:

<dependencies>
  <dependency>
    <groupId>com.solacesystems</groupId>
    <artifactId>solclientj-native</artifactId>
    <version>10.2.0</version>
    <type>nar</type>
    <classifier>amd64-Linux-gcc-jni</classifier>
    <scope>runtime</scope>
  </dependency>
...
  </dependency>
</dependencies>

Is it expected that the solclientj-native nar be composed manually (and stored in appropriate maven repo) for relevant OS implementations?

Unfortunately the sample RTO code, as far as I can see, is based on version 10.0.0. The solclientj-native dependency only being introduced explicitly in 10.2.0.

If you have some guildelines for a JavaRTO gradle build for version 10.2.0 that would be really helpful.

Sincerely, Tim

Tagged:

Best Answer

  • Ragnar
    Ragnar Member, Employee Posts: 67 Solace Employee
    #2 Answer ✓

    Hi Tim,

    Regretfully that is a defect in the 10.2.0 pom file. We recommend that you use 10.1.0 of JavaRTO until we can provide a fix or workaround.

    Regards,

    Ragnar

Answers

  • Ragnar
    Ragnar Member, Employee Posts: 67 Solace Employee
    #3 Answer ✓

    Hi Tim,

    Regretfully that is a defect in the 10.2.0 pom file. We recommend that you use 10.1.0 of JavaRTO until we can provide a fix or workaround.

    Regards,

    Ragnar

  • appsti_bnjy
    appsti_bnjy Member Posts: 2

    Thanks @Ragnar, understood. I will do as you suggest.

    Cheers, Tim