Mailing-List: contact flex-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of igorcosta@gmail.com designates
 209.85.160.47 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CC2998B0.17FB6%cframpto@adobe.com>
References: <5001A5A9.6070801@dot-com-it.com>
 <CC2998B0.17FB6%cframpto@adobe.com>
From: Igor Costa <igorcosta@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 11:19:16 -0300
Message-ID: 
 <CAPxxvdkhvFZLi_f_iqu3iZ+kh4yQpJx3N5QE9qBknPOUpyyr_w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Package com.sun.image.* not Found when building Flex Source RC3
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b15ae45a12cee04c4f31e1c

--047d7b15ae45a12cee04c4f31e1c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Jeffry I used the patch of Christophe to build up on 1.7


The SDK by default is suitable to JRE 1.5.4+ or better 1.6.1 without any
patch.


Regards
----------------------------
Igor Costa
www.igorcosta.com
www.igorcosta.org


On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Carol Frampton <cframpto@adobe.com> wrote:

>
>
> On 7/14/12 1 :00PM, "Jeffry Houser" <jeffry@dot-com-it.com> wrote:
>
> >On 7/14/2012 12:32 PM, Nicholas Kwiatkowski wrote:
> >> Jeffry,
> >>
> >> Where are you seeing that it simply says 1.5.0_13 or higher is
> >> required?  The README clearly says 1.5 or 1.6.  We will want to make
> >> sure that gets corrected for others.
> >
> >  The only place I see version numbers mentioned in the readme is in the
> >environment variables grid under Install Prerequisites.
> >
> >  To quote:
> >
> >     Java SDK 1.5 (0_13 or greater)
> >     or Java SDK 1.6 (*1)
>
> I think this is old wording which I unfortunately didn't improve - maybe
> because I parsed it differently or maybe because I've looked at this stuff
> so many times I don't even see it.  Because it just mentioned the revision
> number I think that was meant to imply the revision could be >= 13.  If I
> originally wrote this I would have written 1.5.13 or greater if I meant
> any later version and I would not have included "or Java SDK 1.6".
>
> Trying to use Java 1.7 is very common mistake.  And yes, we need to get
> rid of our forks of batik and velocity if at all possible.  There is also
> an xerces patch as well but it hasn't been as problematic.
>
> Carol
>
>
> >
> >  I think I asked this before, but it is wrong for me to assume that
> >Java SDK 1.7.something is not greater than Java SDK 1.5.something ?
> >
> >--
> >Jeffry Houser
> >Technical Entrepreneur
> >203-379-0773
> >--
> >http://www.flextras.com?c=104
> >UI Flex Components: Tested! Supported! Ready!
> >--
> >http://www.theflexshow.com
> >http://www.jeffryhouser.com
> >http://www.asktheflexpert.com
> >--
> >Part of the DotComIt Brain Trust
> >
>
>

--047d7b15ae45a12cee04c4f31e1c--