You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org by bu...@apache.org on 2004/01/01 22:36:41 UTC
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 25828] -
[PATCH] fop.sh/bat should use java.endorsed.dirs
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25828>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25828
[PATCH] fop.sh/bat should use java.endorsed.dirs
------- Additional Comments From glenmazza@yahoo.com 2004-01-01 21:36 -------
Simon,
Thanks for your explanation again. The problem you're bringing up may actually
be good news for us though: J2SDK 1.4 users who run FOP from the command line
*aren't* using the Xalan, Xerces, xml-apis.jar files in our lib directory, but
rather the internal ones of the J2SDK. (I tested and confirmed this.)
Indeed, wouldn't you say, the fact that FOP CL has been running fine (very few
complaints, if any) w/1.4's jars for so long would help in reducing the FUD
about removing the XML jars from our distributions once we discontinue 1.2 and
1.3 support? (I.e., if we redirect the 1.4 SDK to the FOP jars, we'll lose
certainty about how reliable the internal SDK jars are--or, learning what the
actual bugs are.)
Also, for buggy internal XML jars of a current or future SDK--this patch would
help command-line, but not embedded usage (they would still use internal, or
whatever is placed in SDK default endorsed directory). So in these cases where
the internal jars are bad, wouldn't it be better if we had instructions on our
website, or a link somewhere, telling users how to update the XML jars in the
default Java endorsed directory? That would cover both CL and embedded.
Sorry for the long post--I'm not certain on this either way. Comments? (Also,
team members, what do you think?)
Thanks again!
Glen
Comments please... (Re: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 25828])
Posted by Glen Mazza <gr...@yahoo.com>.
Team,
If you have anything to add, please comment on this
issue in Bugzilla. More viewpoints may be good here.
Thanks,
Glen
--- bugzilla@apache.org wrote:
> DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
>
> RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE
> AT
>
<http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25828>.
> ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED
> AND
> INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
>
>
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25828
>
> [PATCH] fop.sh/bat should use java.endorsed.dirs
>
>
>
>
>
> ------- Additional Comments From glenmazza@yahoo.com
> 2004-01-01 21:36 -------
> Simon,
>
> Thanks for your explanation again. The problem
> you're bringing up may actually
> be good news for us though: J2SDK 1.4 users who run
> FOP from the command line
> *aren't* using the Xalan, Xerces, xml-apis.jar files
> in our lib directory, but
> rather the internal ones of the J2SDK. (I tested
> and confirmed this.)
>
> Indeed, wouldn't you say, the fact that FOP CL has
> been running fine (very few
> complaints, if any) w/1.4's jars for so long would
> help in reducing the FUD
> about removing the XML jars from our distributions
> once we discontinue 1.2 and
> 1.3 support? (I.e., if we redirect the 1.4 SDK to
> the FOP jars, we'll lose
> certainty about how reliable the internal SDK jars
> are--or, learning what the
> actual bugs are.)
>
> Also, for buggy internal XML jars of a current or
> future SDK--this patch would
> help command-line, but not embedded usage (they
> would still use internal, or
> whatever is placed in SDK default endorsed
> directory). So in these cases where
> the internal jars are bad, wouldn't it be better if
> we had instructions on our
> website, or a link somewhere, telling users how to
> update the XML jars in the
> default Java endorsed directory? That would cover
> both CL and embedded.
>
> Sorry for the long post--I'm not certain on this
> either way. Comments? (Also,
> team members, what do you think?)
>
> Thanks again!
> Glen
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/