super(componentName + " is not available.");
    }

    public ContainerNotAvailableException(final String componentName, final Throwable cause) {
        super(componentName + " is not available.", cause);
        this.componentName = componentName;
    }

    public ContainerNotAvailableException(final Throwable cause) {
        super("Container is not avaiable.");
        componentName = "container";
    }

#   * For example: A user cannot expect ${Hostname} to be expanded, as it is an environment variable and will be
#     treated as '${Hostname}' itself on the command line.

set -- \
        "-Dorg.gradle.appname=$APP_BASE_NAME" \
        -classpath "$CLASSPATH" \
        org.gradle.wrapper.GradleWrapperMain \
        "$@"

# Stop when "xargs" is not available.
if ! command -v xargs >/dev/null 2>&1
then
    die "xargs is not available"

#   * For example: A user cannot expect ${Hostname} to be expanded, as it is an environment variable and will be
#     treated as '${Hostname}' itself on the command line.

set -- \
        "-Dorg.gradle.appname=$APP_BASE_NAME" \
        -classpath "$CLASSPATH" \
        org.gradle.wrapper.GradleWrapperMain \
        "$@"

# Stop when "xargs" is not available.
if ! command -v xargs >/dev/null 2>&1
then
    die "xargs is not available"

 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code

 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code

 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code

 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code

 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code

 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code

 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code