cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bart Molenkamp" <b.molenk...@bizzdesign.nl>
Subject RE: [2.2] Duplicate (and different) versions of batik on classpath
Date Tue, 19 Dec 2006 10:35:15 GMT
Ok, I found http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MECLIPSE-122.

Seems to be fixed, but not yet released... (looking at
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/maven/plugins/maven-eclipse-plu
gin/

Bart.

> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: Bart Molenkamp
> Verzonden: dinsdag 19 december 2006 11:19
> Aan: dev@cocoon.apache.org
> Onderwerp: RE: [2.2] Duplicate (and different) versions of batik on
> classpath
> 
> It seems to work. Thanks for that.
> 
> However, I think I found another problem related to Eclipse. Batik has
a
> dependency to rhino:js:1.5R4.1, but cocoon-core has a dependency to
> rhino:js:1.6R5. When I build my block, or when I build from the root
> pom, Maven builds against 1.6R5 (it removes 1.5R4.1 from the
classpath).
> This is correct.
> 
> But when I build the Eclipse descriptors, it adds rhino:js:1.5R4.1 to
> the classpath. That is wrong, IMO. It should add the dependency to
> rhino:js:1.6R5 (transitively trough cocoon-core's dependencies).
> 
> You can see it for yourself by creating all the eclipse descriptors
for
> trunk, and then opening the block cocoon-batik-impl (you'll see the
> wrong version of rhino:js on the classpath). Is this a known problem,
or
> better, does anybody know how to solve this?
> 
> Thanks,
> Bart.
> 
> > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> > Van: Daniel Fagerstrom [mailto:danielf@nada.kth.se]
> > Verzonden: dinsdag 19 december 2006 9:51
> > Aan: dev@cocoon.apache.org
> > Onderwerp: Re: [2.2] Duplicate (and different) versions of batik on
> > classpath
> >
> > I removed the dependency on batik-1.5-fop, thanks for spotting the
> > problem. I haven't done much testing yet, please report if there are
> any
> > problems.
> >
> > /Daniel
> >
> > Bart Molenkamp skrev:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I found a problem with the cocoon-batik-impl block. When I add a
> > > dependency to this block, I end up with two different versions of
> Batik
> > > on my classpath. The first (and correct) one is batik-1.6-1. But
due
> to
> > > a dependency to fop 0.20.5, batik-1.5-fop gets included (which is
> not
> > > compatible with batik-1.6-1). See the snippet below that I got
when
> > > running maven with the -X option:
> > >
> > > batik:batik-squiggle:jar:1.6-1:compile (selected for compile)
> > >   batik:batik-swing:jar:1.6-1:compile (selected for compile)
> > >   batik:batik-transcoder:jar:1.6-1:compile (selected for compile)
> > >     fop:fop:jar:0.20.5:compile (selected for compile)
> > >       xml-apis:xml-apis:jar:1.0.b2:compile (removed - nearer
found:
> > > 1.3.02)
> > >       xerces:xercesImpl:jar:2.2.1:compile (removed - nearer found:
> > > 2.8.0)
> > >       batik:batik-1.5-fop:jar:0.20-5:compile (selected for
compile)
> > >
> > > When I run the webapp from the commandline, using the maven jetty
> > > plugin, everything seems to work fine. But when I run it in
Eclipse
> > > (using the Jetty launcher plugin), I get classpath errors.
> > >
> > > First conflict I found was that of
> o.a.batik.dom.AbstractDocument.<init>
> > > (constructor signature changed in 1.6-1). After removing
> batik-1.5-fop
> > > jar from my classpath, I ran into another classpath problem.
> > > org.apache.cocoon.xml.dom.SVGBuilder accesses the protected member
> > > 'namespaces', which is of type
> org.apache.batik.dom.util.HashTableStack.
> > > The signature method 'put' has changed from 'put(String, Object)'
to
> > > 'put(String, String)'. It looks like the cocoon-batik-impl block
is
> > > built against batik-1.5-fop, and not batik-1.6-fop.
> > >
> > > When I exclude batik-1.5-fop as a dependency, everything seems to
> work
> > > fine (but I don't know what functionality of batik requires
> > > batik-1.5-fop). It worked either by excluding the dependency from
> > > cocoon-batik-impl's pom.xml (but I had to declare the exclusion
> several
> > > times), or when I exclude it from fop-0.20.5.pom (from my local
> > > repository).
> > >
> > > How can this problem be resolved? Anybody interested in the
changed
> pom?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Bart.
> > >
> > >
> 



Mime
View raw message