You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to cvs@cocoon.apache.org by jo...@apache.org on 2003/08/12 09:52:20 UTC

cvs commit: cocoon-2.1/src/blocks/fop/lib fop-0.20.5.jar

joerg       2003/08/12 00:52:20

  Modified:    src/blocks/fop/lib fop-0.20.5.jar
  Log:
  rebuilt the jar with Cocoon's versions of Batik, XML apis, Avalon framework
  
  Revision  Changes    Path
  1.2       +4332 -4307cocoon-2.1/src/blocks/fop/lib/fop-0.20.5.jar
  
  	<<Binary file>>
  
  

Re: cvs commit: cocoon-2.1/src/blocks/fop/lib fop-0.20.5.jar

Posted by Vadim Gritsenko <va...@verizon.net>.
Joerg Heinicke wrote:

> Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
>
>> joerg@apache.org wrote:
>>
>>> rebuilt the jar with Cocoon's versions of Batik, XML apis, Avalon 
>>> framework
>>
>>
>> Can you clarify why is this required? I'm a bit puzzled (release is, 
>> well, release and JAR should not change).
>>
>
> If we don't build Fop from source but use the released JAR as it is we 
> must also use the Batik version used for the build. In this special 
> case Neil Bacon reported an incompatibility between Fop 0.20.5 (built 
> with batik 1.5b4) and the batik 1.5b5 used in Cocoon: 
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-users&m=106067191423402&w=2. 


java.lang.NoSuchMethodError:
org.apache.batik.dom.svg.SAXSVGDocumentFactory.createDocument


Hmmm.... Strange.

Vadim



Re: cvs commit: cocoon-2.1/src/blocks/fop/lib fop-0.20.5.jar

Posted by Joerg Heinicke <jh...@virbus.de>.
> Can we upgrade to Batik 1.5? http://xml.apache.org/batik/dist/

We did already.

Joerg


Re: cvs commit: cocoon-2.1/src/blocks/fop/lib fop-0.20.5.jar

Posted by Antonio Gallardo <ag...@agsoftware.dnsalias.com>.
Joerg Heinicke dijo:
> Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
>> joerg@apache.org wrote:
>>
>>> joerg       2003/08/12 00:52:20
>>>
>>>  Modified:    src/blocks/fop/lib fop-0.20.5.jar
>>>  Log:
>>>  rebuilt the jar with Cocoon's versions of Batik, XML apis, Avalon
>>> framework
>>>
>>>  Revision  Changes    Path
>>>  1.2       +4332 -4307cocoon-2.1/src/blocks/fop/lib/fop-0.20.5.jar
>>>
>>>      <<Binary file>>
>>>
>>
>> Can you clarify why is this required? I'm a bit puzzled (release is,
>> well, release and JAR should not change).
>>
>> Vadim
>
> If we don't build Fop from source but use the released JAR as it is we
> must also use the Batik version used for the build. In this special case
>  Neil Bacon reported an incompatibility between Fop 0.20.5 (built with
> batik 1.5b4) and the batik 1.5b5 used in Cocoon:
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-users&m=106067191423402&w=2.

Can we upgrade to Batik 1.5? http://xml.apache.org/batik/dist/

Best Regards,

Antonio Gallardo
>
> Joerg




Re: cvs commit: cocoon-2.1/src/blocks/fop/lib fop-0.20.5.jar

Posted by Joerg Heinicke <jh...@virbus.de>.
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
> joerg@apache.org wrote:
> 
>> joerg       2003/08/12 00:52:20
>>
>>  Modified:    src/blocks/fop/lib fop-0.20.5.jar
>>  Log:
>>  rebuilt the jar with Cocoon's versions of Batik, XML apis, Avalon 
>> framework
>>  
>>  Revision  Changes    Path
>>  1.2       +4332 -4307cocoon-2.1/src/blocks/fop/lib/fop-0.20.5.jar
>>  
>>      <<Binary file>>
>>
> 
> Can you clarify why is this required? I'm a bit puzzled (release is, 
> well, release and JAR should not change).
> 
> Vadim

If we don't build Fop from source but use the released JAR as it is we 
must also use the Batik version used for the build. In this special case 
Neil Bacon reported an incompatibility between Fop 0.20.5 (built with 
batik 1.5b4) and the batik 1.5b5 used in Cocoon: 
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-users&m=106067191423402&w=2.

Joerg


Re: cvs commit: cocoon-2.1/src/blocks/fop/lib fop-0.20.5.jar

Posted by Vadim Gritsenko <va...@verizon.net>.
joerg@apache.org wrote:

>joerg       2003/08/12 00:52:20
>
>  Modified:    src/blocks/fop/lib fop-0.20.5.jar
>  Log:
>  rebuilt the jar with Cocoon's versions of Batik, XML apis, Avalon framework
>  
>  Revision  Changes    Path
>  1.2       +4332 -4307cocoon-2.1/src/blocks/fop/lib/fop-0.20.5.jar
>  
>  	<<Binary file>>
>

Can you clarify why is this required? I'm a bit puzzled (release is, 
well, release and JAR should not change).

Vadim