From fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com Thu Feb 01 08:39:53 2007 Return-Path: <fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com> Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 59629 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2007 08:39:52 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Feb 2007 08:39:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 69277 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2007 08:39:58 -0000 Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 69254 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2007 08:39:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mitchellbarry@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Id: <fop-dev.xmlgraphics.apache.org> Reply-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 69243 invoked by uid 99); 1 Feb 2007 08:39:57 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 00:39:57 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (herse.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO moutng.kundenserver.de) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 00:39:49 -0800 Received: from [83.161.120.155] (helo=[83.161.120.155]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mrelayeu3) with ESMTP (Nemesis), id 0MKxQS-1HCXTX2pYL-0004BQ; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 09:39:23 +0100 Message-ID: <mitchellbarry@example.com> Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 09:39:19 +0100 From: Christian Geisert <mitchellbarry@example.com> Organization: ISU GmbH User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (X11/20051017) X-Accept-Language: de-DE, de, en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mitchellbarry@example.com Subject: Re: Communication References: <007401c745cb$41427320$2f067a46@jayb> In-Reply-To: <007401c745cb$41427320$2f067a46@jayb> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: kundenserver.de mitchellbarry@example.com login:c7095967f8353cd07da14967482bdbb9 X-Provags-ID2: V01U2FsdGVkX1/nGTNmxBuj7bLKyu8hL70AQpoDZhRpcZCmlmuJHMOfEyB30Xfgt2MdTfB+GG7f2wAaInr2r72diobVRdJ+2MmPkAT4C6WEByr9W+QWOiYLuAz4O+AThvUe X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Jay Bryant schrieb: > I tried to ask a question and got a returned mail notice (reason: 552 > Message rejected as it is spam (body)) > > So how do I attach code and ask a question about it? Maybe send it inline instead as a attachement? I guess the simplest thing would be to publish it on website somewhere and just send the link (I don't know if your ASF account is already set up but as a committer you have a "personal webspace" [1]) Christian [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/new-committers-guide.html#public_html From fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com Thu Feb 01 08:57:45 2007 Return-Path: <fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com> Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 64807 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2007 08:57:44 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Feb 2007 08:57:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 89256 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2007 08:57:49 -0000 Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 89239 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2007 08:57:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mitchellbarry@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Id: <fop-dev.xmlgraphics.apache.org> Reply-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 89228 invoked by uid 99); 1 Feb 2007 08:57:49 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 00:57:49 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of mitchellbarry@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO bay0-omc3-s36.bay0.hotmail.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 00:57:38 -0800 Received: from hotmail.com ([83.161.120.155]) by bay0-omc3-s36.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(747)783-1287); Thu, 1 Feb 2007 00:57:18 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 1 Feb 2007 00:57:18 -0800 Message-ID: <mitchellbarry@example.com> Received: from 83.161.120.155 by BAY117-DAV14.phx.gbl with DAV; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 08:57:15 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [83.161.120.155] X-Originating-Email: [mitchellbarry@example.com] X-Sender: mitchellbarry@example.com Message-ID: <mitchellbarry@example.com> Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 08:59:09 +0000 From: Chris Bowditch <mitchellbarry@example.com> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031013 Thunderbird/0.3 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mitchellbarry@example.com Subject: Re: Feature and Bug References: <mitchellbarry@example.com> In-Reply-To: <mitchellbarry@example.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Feb 2007 08:57:18.0152 (UTC) FILETIME=[F9EDDC80:01C745DE] X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Jim Tivy wrote: > Hi Folks > > I am new to this community. Thanks to all the FOP contributors to getting > this out. > > We are trying to deploy a formatting solution to a customer. One reason we > chose .93 was because it would allow us to define an even page with zero > renderable space - done by setting a top and bottom margin adding up to 11 > inches: Another possibility is to name the fo:region-body on even page masters with a different region name. That way they should be excluded from the flowing content which is tied to the region body on odd pages only. > > <fo:simple-page-master page-width="8.5in" page-height="11in" > margin-top="0in" > margin-bottom="0in" margin-left="0in" margin-right="0in" > master-name="evenFlowBlank"> > <fo:region-body margin-left=".5in" margin-right=".5in" > margin-top="8in" margin-bottom="3in"/> > <fo:region-after region-name="afterFlowBlank" extent="0.5in"/> > </fo:simple-page-master> > > This works great, except every once in a while FOP .93 decides it is > experiencing a flow problem and decides to render on this "zero space page". > FOP seems quite erratic when it decides to do this illegal rendering - seems > to be related to how the blocks are nested and what follows the text. As > well, FOP knows it is doing something wrong and issues a warning: > > Jan 31, 2007 2:10:12 PM org.apache.fop.layoutmgr.PageSequenceLayoutManager$1 > notifyOverflow > WARNING: Content of the region-body on page 6 overflows the available area > in block-progression dimension. (fo > :page-sequence, location: 217/74) Interesting. I'll let one of the layout experts comment on this. Certainly not what I'd expect. > > Is there anyone who can help me with this bug and/or should it be reported > elsewhere. BTW, you have posted to an inappropriate mailing list. The correct list for user questions on FOP is mitchellbarry@example.com. The developers check the user list just as often as this list! > > As well, I can make the .fo files available as necessary. Thanks, Chris From fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com Thu Feb 01 15:31:49 2007 Return-Path: <fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com> Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 75563 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2007 15:31:48 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Feb 2007 15:31:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 83670 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2007 15:31:53 -0000 Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 83647 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2007 15:31:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mitchellbarry@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Id: <fop-dev.xmlgraphics.apache.org> Reply-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 83636 invoked by uid 99); 1 Feb 2007 15:31:52 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 07:31:52 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-9.4 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,NO_REAL_NAME X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 07:31:46 -0800 Received: by brutus.apache.org (Postfix, from userid 33) id ABB3C7142D0; Thu, 1 Feb 2007 07:31:25 -0800 (PST) From: mitchellbarry@example.com To: mitchellbarry@example.com Subject: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41514] New: - [PATCH] Strict url validation of user config Message-ID: <mitchellbarry@example.com/bugzilla/> X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 07:31:25 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41514>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41514 Summary: [PATCH] Strict url validation of user config Product: Fop Version: 0.93 Platform: Other OS/Version: other Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: general AssignedTo: mitchellbarry@example.com ReportedBy: mitchellbarry@example.com Configuration checking for fonts and base urls is now much stricter given <strict-validation>true</strict-validation> (this is the default value) in the user config This should address the following bugs :- http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40120 http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40288 Patch file and zip file containing new files will be attached. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. From fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com Thu Feb 01 15:32:41 2007 Return-Path: <fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com> Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 75835 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2007 15:32:40 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Feb 2007 15:32:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 84817 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2007 15:32:43 -0000 Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 84791 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2007 15:32:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mitchellbarry@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Id: <fop-dev.xmlgraphics.apache.org> Reply-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 84777 invoked by uid 99); 1 Feb 2007 15:32:43 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 07:32:43 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-9.4 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,NO_REAL_NAME,UPPERCASE_25_50 X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 07:32:36 -0800 Received: by brutus.apache.org (Postfix, from userid 33) id 3DCC87142D0; Thu, 1 Feb 2007 07:32:16 -0800 (PST) From: mitchellbarry@example.com To: mitchellbarry@example.com Subject: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41514] - [PATCH] Strict url validation of user config In-Reply-To: <mitchellbarry@example.com/bugzilla/> X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo Message-Id: <mitchellbarry@example.com> Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 07:32:16 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41514>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41514 ------- Additional Comments From mitchellbarry@example.com 2007-02-01 07:32 ------- Created an attachment (id=19492) --> (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19492&action=view) main patch file -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. From fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com Thu Feb 01 15:35:25 2007 Return-Path: <fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com> Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 77735 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2007 15:35:25 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Feb 2007 15:35:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 87711 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2007 15:35:31 -0000 Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 87368 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2007 15:35:30 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mitchellbarry@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Id: <fop-dev.xmlgraphics.apache.org> Reply-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 87357 invoked by uid 99); 1 Feb 2007 15:35:30 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 07:35:30 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-9.4 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,NO_REAL_NAME,UPPERCASE_25_50 X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 07:35:23 -0800 Received: by brutus.apache.org (Postfix, from userid 33) id 2C0337142D0; Thu, 1 Feb 2007 07:35:02 -0800 (PST) From: mitchellbarry@example.com To: mitchellbarry@example.com Subject: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41514] - [PATCH] Strict url validation of user config In-Reply-To: <mitchellbarry@example.com/bugzilla/> X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo Message-Id: <mitchellbarry@example.com> Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 07:35:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41514>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41514 ------- Additional Comments From mitchellbarry@example.com 2007-02-01 07:34 ------- Created an attachment (id=19493) --> (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19493&action=view) new package (and files) under test/src/org.apache.fop.config -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. From fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com Thu Feb 01 15:37:20 2007 Return-Path: <fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com> Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 78246 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2007 15:37:19 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Feb 2007 15:37:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 90852 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2007 15:37:25 -0000 Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 90829 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2007 15:37:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mitchellbarry@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Id: <fop-dev.xmlgraphics.apache.org> Reply-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 90818 invoked by uid 99); 1 Feb 2007 15:37:25 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 07:37:25 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-9.4 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,NO_REAL_NAME,UPPERCASE_25_50 X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 07:37:18 -0800 Received: by brutus.apache.org (Postfix, from userid 33) id 35C227142D0; Thu, 1 Feb 2007 07:36:58 -0800 (PST) From: mitchellbarry@example.com To: mitchellbarry@example.com Subject: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40120] - font-base wrongly interpreted when embedding font and input in folder In-Reply-To: <{{EMAIL+PHONE}}/bugzilla/> X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo Message-Id: <mitchellbarry@example.com> Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 07:36:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40120>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40120 mitchellbarry@example.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED ------- Additional Comments From mitchellbarry@example.com 2007-02-01 07:36 ------- This bug should be fixed/addressed by [PATCH] http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41514 -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. From fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com Thu Feb 01 15:39:01 2007 Return-Path: <fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com> Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 78518 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2007 15:39:00 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Feb 2007 15:39:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 92494 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2007 15:39:06 -0000 Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 92155 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2007 15:39:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mitchellbarry@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Id: <fop-dev.xmlgraphics.apache.org> Reply-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 92144 invoked by uid 99); 1 Feb 2007 15:39:06 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 07:39:05 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-9.4 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,NO_REAL_NAME,UPPERCASE_25_50 X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 07:38:59 -0800 Received: by brutus.apache.org (Postfix, from userid 33) id E32157142D0; Thu, 1 Feb 2007 07:38:38 -0800 (PST) From: mitchellbarry@example.com To: mitchellbarry@example.com Subject: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40288] - <base> url requires "/", failes otherwise In-Reply-To: <{{EMAIL+PHONE}}/bugzilla/> X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo Message-Id: <mitchellbarry@example.com> Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 07:38:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40288>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40288 mitchellbarry@example.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED ------- Additional Comments From mitchellbarry@example.com 2007-02-01 07:38 ------- This bug should be fixed/addressed by [PATCH] http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41514 -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. From fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com Thu Feb 01 20:14:17 2007 Return-Path: <fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com> Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 4126 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2007 20:14:17 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Feb 2007 20:14:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 80202 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2007 20:14:22 -0000 Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 80181 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2007 20:14:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mitchellbarry@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Id: <fop-dev.xmlgraphics.apache.org> Reply-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 80170 invoked by uid 99); 1 Feb 2007 20:14:21 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 12:14:21 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-9.4 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,NO_REAL_NAME X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 12:14:14 -0800 Received: by brutus.apache.org (Postfix, from userid 33) id A40747142B6; Thu, 1 Feb 2007 12:13:54 -0800 (PST) From: mitchellbarry@example.com To: mitchellbarry@example.com Subject: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41514] - [PATCH] Strict url validation of user config In-Reply-To: <mitchellbarry@example.com/bugzilla/> X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo Message-Id: <mitchellbarry@example.com> Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 12:13:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41514>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41514 ------- Additional Comments From mitchellbarry@example.com 2007-02-01 12:13 ------- The patch is fairly large and seems to address more than only validation of the configuration file. Can you give a summary? I am against this exception being thrown if I do not use the font arial at all: [ERROR] FOP - Exception <org.apache.avalon.framework.configuration.ConfigurationException: Failed to resolve font metric-url 'arial.xml'>org.apache.avalon.framework.configuration.ConfigurationException: Failed to resolve font metric-url 'arial.xml' I am also against combining strict validation of the FO file and the user configuration; they are two different things. I would appreciate a separate option 'validate-configuration', which checks every entry in the configuration file. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. From fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com Thu Feb 01 21:05:36 2007 Return-Path: <fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com> Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 33896 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2007 21:05:36 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Feb 2007 21:05:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 60864 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2007 21:05:41 -0000 Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 60845 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2007 21:05:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mitchellbarry@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Id: <fop-dev.xmlgraphics.apache.org> Reply-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 60831 invoked by uid 99); 1 Feb 2007 21:05:41 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 13:05:41 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.3 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of mitchellbarry@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO ciao.gmane.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 13:05:30 -0800 Received: from root by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1HCj78-00013c-4A for mitchellbarry@example.com; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 22:05:04 +0100 Received: from 83.161.120.155.rev.vodafone.pt ([83.161.120.155]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <mitchellbarry@example.com>; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 22:05:02 +0100 Received: from koen.heene by 83.161.120.155.rev.vodafone.pt with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <mitchellbarry@example.com>; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 22:05:02 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: mitchellbarry@example.com From: Koen Heene <mitchellbarry@example.com> Subject: Render a PNG into RTF after having rendered into a PDF works only using imageFactory.clearCaches() Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 21:04:03 +0000 (UTC) Lines: 34 Message-ID: <mitchellbarry@example.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: mitchellbarry@example.com X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org User-Agent: Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/) X-Loom-IP: 83.161.120.155 (Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.2; en-GB; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20061204 Firefox/83.161.120.155) Sender: news <mitchellbarry@example.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hello I have a web application (thus multi threaded) where people can request a xml document in PDF or RTF. The document contains a PNG image. A web request for rendering into a PDF is always successful. A web request for rendering into a RTF is (most of the time) not successful, when a PDF was already requested for that same document. Rendering into a RTF is successful when no PDF was requested yet. I solved the problem calling imageFactory.clearCaches(), which you strongly advise not to call in the documentation. I force the re-reading of the PNG-file in that way, isn't it? I read a bit in the mailing lists and found similar messages, but the Java Exception I get is 1/Fev/2007 20:50:34 org.apache.fop.render.rtf.RTFHandler image SEVERE: Error while handling an external-graphic: null mitchellbarry@example.com(PNGImage.java:74) at org.apache.fop.image.AbstractFopImage.load(AbstractFopImage.java:174) at org.apache.fop.render.rtf.RTFHandler.image(RTFHandler.java:1131) which is different form the exceptions I have seen in the mailing lists. I have the feeling that the image cache doesn't properly reuse the image (maybe because of the multi threaded environment), holds a lock on the PNG file and therefore doesn't allow that file to be re-read. Any ideas or solutions? Koen From fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com Thu Feb 01 21:06:42 2007 Return-Path: <fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com> Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 34430 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2007 21:06:41 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Feb 2007 21:06:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 64143 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2007 21:06:46 -0000 Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 64123 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2007 21:06:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mitchellbarry@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Id: <fop-dev.xmlgraphics.apache.org> Reply-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list mitchellbarry@example.com Delivered-To: moderator for mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 41346 invoked by uid 99); 1 Feb 2007 20:54:25 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of mitchellbarry@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=tTxYTT5JgwBKqjWfwPt8XxNOuPn8ZaYbhtGX1Ln/vItjphcetgFZg3boeSFCr7BQYY1iqeSRM+RpWI4nXJAFqspGeAauDF9KenrH6rnayprS28DXI7CHHDL4nzCQLQV9U6bw6rnnD2QBAz3K66Jq7dWFKZxY4wUCUJWtR8SV4gU= Message-ID: <mitchellbarry@example.com> Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 20:53:53 +0000 From: "Koen Heene" <mitchellbarry@example.com> To: mitchellbarry@example.com Subject: Render a PNG into RTF after having rendered into a PDF works only using imageFactory.clearCaches() MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hello I have a web application (thus multi threaded) where people can request a xml document in PDF or RTF. The document contains a PNG image. A web request for rendering into a PDF is always successful. A web request for rendering into a RTF is (most of the time) not successful, when a PDF was already requested for that same document. Rendering into a RTF is successful when no PDF was requested yet. I solved the problem calling imageFactory.clearCaches(), which you strongly advise not to call in the documentation. I force the re-reading of the PNG-file in that way, isn't it? I read a bit in the mailing lists and found similar messages, but the Java Exception I get is 1/Fev/2007 20:50:34 org.apache.fop.render.rtf.RTFHandler image SEVERE: Error while handling an external-graphic: null mitchellbarry@example.com(PNGImage.java:74) at org.apache.fop.image.AbstractFopImage.load(AbstractFopImage.java:174) at org.apache.fop.render.rtf.RTFHandler.image(RTFHandler.java:1131) which is different form the exceptions I have seen in the mailing lists. I have the feeling that the image cache doesn't properly reuse the image (maybe because of the multi threaded environment), holds a lock on the PNG file and therefore doesn't allow that file to be re-read. Any ideas or solutions? Koen -------------------------------- mitchellbarry@example.com PORTUGAL Tel.: (747)783-1287 Mobile: (747)783-1287 BELGIE Mobile: (747)783-1287 From fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com Thu Feb 01 22:29:48 2007 Return-Path: <fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com> Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 66817 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2007 22:29:48 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Feb 2007 22:29:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 30473 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2007 22:29:53 -0000 Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 30449 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2007 22:29:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mitchellbarry@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Id: <fop-dev.xmlgraphics.apache.org> Reply-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 30438 invoked by uid 99); 1 Feb 2007 22:29:53 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 14:29:53 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO astra.telenet-ops.be) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 14:29:43 -0800 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [83.161.120.155]) by astra.telenet-ops.be (Postfix) with SMTP id DDB3438115 for <mitchellbarry@example.com>; Thu, 1 Feb 2007 23:29:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (d54C53607.access.telenet.be [83.161.120.155]) by astra.telenet-ops.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD87538105 for <mitchellbarry@example.com>; Thu, 1 Feb 2007 23:29:21 +0100 (CET) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) In-Reply-To: <mitchellbarry@example.com> References: <mitchellbarry@example.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <mitchellbarry@example.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Andreas L Delmelle <mitchellbarry@example.com> Subject: Re: Render a PNG into RTF after having rendered into a PDF works only using imageFactory.clearCaches() Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 23:29:03 +0100 To: mitchellbarry@example.com X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Feb 1, 2007, at 21:53, Koen Heene wrote: > <snip /> > I have the feeling that the image cache doesn't properly reuse the > image (maybe because of the multi threaded environment), holds a lock > on the PNG file and therefore doesn't allow that file to be re-read. Looking into the code, it seems like clearCaches() should be removed (it is used nowhere; if it is not meant to be called, then it should be suppressed). In the normal course of events, images are released via a call to ImageCache.releaseImage(). clearCaches() works differently, leading to this strange NPE... What Exception do you get when a PDF is rendered first? There's a patch in queue (bugzilla 41488) which may solve your problem. HTH! Cheers, Andreas From fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com Thu Feb 01 23:56:59 2007 Return-Path: <fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com> Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 87922 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2007 23:56:48 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Feb 2007 23:56:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 81096 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2007 23:56:54 -0000 Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 80823 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2007 23:56:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mitchellbarry@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Id: <fop-dev.xmlgraphics.apache.org> Reply-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 80812 invoked by uid 99); 1 Feb 2007 23:56:52 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 15:56:52 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (herse.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO ms-smtp-06.texas.rr.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 15:56:43 -0800 Received: from jayb (cpe-70-122-6-47.austin.res.rr.com [83.161.120.155]) by ms-smtp-06.texas.rr.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id l11NuJ2H008295 for <mitchellbarry@example.com>; Thu, 1 Feb 2007 17:56:20 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <000501c7465c$916e50d0$2f067a46@jayb> From: "Jay Bryant" <mitchellbarry@example.com> To: <mitchellbarry@example.com> References: <007401c745cb$41427320$2f067a46@jayb> <mitchellbarry@example.com> Subject: Re: Communication Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 17:56:17 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org > Jay Bryant schrieb: >> I tried to ask a question and got a returned mail notice (reason: 552 >> Message rejected as it is spam (body)) >> >> So how do I attach code and ask a question about it? > > Maybe send it inline instead as a attachement? > I guess the simplest thing would be to publish it on website somewhere > and just send the link (I don't know if your ASF account is already set > up but as a committer you have a "personal webspace" [1]) > > Christian > > [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/new-committers-guide.html#public_html > Hi, Christian (and other folks), As it happens, I figured out my problem (my Ant target was putting the META-INF folder in the wrong place). However, it's good to know that we have some web space, so that we can share implementation ideas before commiting them. Thanks. Jay Bryant Bryant Communication Services From fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com Fri Feb 02 00:10:42 2007 Return-Path: <fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com> Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 91602 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2007 00:10:42 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Feb 2007 00:10:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 99864 invoked by uid 500); 2 Feb 2007 00:10:47 -0000 Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 99838 invoked by uid 500); 2 Feb 2007 00:10:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mitchellbarry@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Id: <fop-dev.xmlgraphics.apache.org> Reply-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 99814 invoked by uid 99); 2 Feb 2007 00:10:47 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 16:10:47 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail8.hostek.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 16:10:37 -0800 X-SMSpamC: skipped (authenticated sender) Received: from stat-153-124-199.myactv.net [83.161.120.155] by mail8.hostek.com with SMTP; Thu, 1 Feb 2007 18:09:10 -0600 From: "Jeff Vannest" <mitchellbarry@example.com> To: <mitchellbarry@example.com> Subject: Forcing Xerces/Xalan parsers in JVM Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 19:09:06 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 Thread-Index: AcdGXlpnQJu6bn88QICG16enzmH3Rw== X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Message-Id: <mitchellbarry@example.com> I've embedded FOP 0.93 in an Oracle AS 10g (9.0.4) Reports pluggable destination, which itself is implemented as a J2EE application. Therefore, FOP is called as part of the already-running J2EE environment. The problem that I'm having is that the Oracle XML parser blows chunks and won't properly parse documents in order for FOP to work correctly. I have everything working properly as long as I put Xerces and Xml-apis in the pre-boot class path (e.g. "-Xbootclasspath^/p:...") and specifying Xalan as the TransformFactory (e.g. "... -Djavax.xml.transform.TransformerFactory=org.apache.xalan.processor.Transfor merFactoryImpl). However, although this configuration works perfectly, Oracle has specifically declared that it will not be supported. Basically if Xerces/Xalan ever blows up Oracle Reports, our enterprise's million dollar support contract is worthless. Soooooooooooo... Question: Is there any other way to force FOP to use the Xalan transformer factory without overriding it for the entire Oracle Reports application? I may even be allowed the time and resources to create a FOP patch in order to make this modification if required. As always, thank you in advance for your thoughts. Jeff From fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com Fri Feb 02 08:24:22 2007 Return-Path: <fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com> Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 27322 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2007 08:24:20 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Feb 2007 08:24:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 76596 invoked by uid 500); 2 Feb 2007 08:24:26 -0000 Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 76392 invoked by uid 500); 2 Feb 2007 08:24:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mitchellbarry@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Id: <fop-dev.xmlgraphics.apache.org> Reply-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 76381 invoked by uid 99); 2 Feb 2007 08:24:25 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Feb 2007 00:24:25 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO tux17.hoststar.ch) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Feb 2007 00:24:15 -0800 Received: from [83.161.120.155] (adsl-84-226-42-232.adslplus.ch [83.161.120.155]) (authenticated bits=0) by tux17.hoststar.ch (8.13.6/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l128NtR9022986 for <mitchellbarry@example.com>; Fri, 2 Feb 2007 09:23:55 +0100 Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 09:24:01 +0100 From: Jeremias Maerki <mitchellbarry@example.com> To: mitchellbarry@example.com Subject: Re: Render a PNG into RTF after having rendered into a PDF works only using imageFactory.clearCaches() In-Reply-To: <mitchellbarry@example.com> References: <mitchellbarry@example.com> <mitchellbarry@example.com> Message-Id: <mitchellbarry@example.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Becky! ver. 2.28.01 [en] X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 000709-2, 01.02.2007), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org I'm against removing clearCaches() at this time. It's like removing the strokeText setting in the PDF Transcoder that would have been helpful in some situations after it was removed. Yes, clearCaches() should not be necessary today but as a last resort it is useful to have around. Do I understand this correctly, that the NPE happens despite the call to clearCaches()? If that is so, it is certainly a bug or another thread might already have added a decoded PNG to the cache. The easiest work-around is to use a different FopFactory for RTF and for PDF output because then you'll have two different caches. That wouldn't have been possible prior to the API redesign. Anyway, the root of the problem here is, surprise, the image library which is not prepared to maintain both the original form of the PNG (like the RTF renderer expects) and the decoded form as currently the PDF renderer expects. Actually, PDF would be able to process the undecoded form of the PDF, too, but that's not implemented, either. I guess I finally have to write that detailed specification of the improved image library I have in my head. On 01.02.2007 23:29:03 Andreas L Delmelle wrote: > On Feb 1, 2007, at 21:53, Koen Heene wrote: >=20 > > <snip /> > > I have the feeling that the image cache doesn't properly reuse the > > image (maybe because of the multi threaded environment), holds a lock > > on the PNG file and therefore doesn't allow that file to be re-read. >=20 > Looking into the code, it seems like clearCaches() should be removed =20 > (it is used nowhere; if it is not meant to be called, then it should =20 > be suppressed). >=20 > In the normal course of events, images are released via a call to =20 > ImageCache.releaseImage(). clearCaches() works differently, leading =20 > to this strange NPE... >=20 > What Exception do you get when a PDF is rendered first? There's a =20 > patch in queue (bugzilla 41488) which may solve your problem. >=20 >=20 > HTH! >=20 > Cheers, >=20 > Andreas Jeremias Maerki From fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com Fri Feb 02 08:42:39 2007 Return-Path: <fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com> Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 32885 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2007 08:42:39 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Feb 2007 08:42:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 6218 invoked by uid 500); 2 Feb 2007 08:42:44 -0000 Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 6194 invoked by uid 500); 2 Feb 2007 08:42:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mitchellbarry@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Id: <fop-dev.xmlgraphics.apache.org> Reply-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 6183 invoked by uid 99); 2 Feb 2007 08:42:44 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Feb 2007 00:42:44 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.3 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of mitchellbarry@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO ciao.gmane.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Feb 2007 00:42:33 -0800 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1HCtzg-0001TK-4z for mitchellbarry@example.com; Fri, 02 Feb 2007 09:42:04 +0100 Received: from 83.161.120.155.rev.vodafone.pt ([83.161.120.155]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <mitchellbarry@example.com>; Fri, 02 Feb 2007 09:42:04 +0100 Received: from koen.heene by 83.161.120.155.rev.vodafone.pt with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <mitchellbarry@example.com>; Fri, 02 Feb 2007 09:42:04 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: mitchellbarry@example.com From: Koen Heene <mitchellbarry@example.com> Subject: Re: Render a PNG into RTF after having rendered into a PDF works only using imageFactory.clearCaches() Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 08:41:49 +0000 (UTC) Lines: 10 Message-ID: <mitchellbarry@example.com> References: <mitchellbarry@example.com> <mitchellbarry@example.com> <mitchellbarry@example.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: mitchellbarry@example.com X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org User-Agent: Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/) X-Loom-IP: 83.161.120.155 (Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.2; en-GB; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20061204 Firefox/83.161.120.155) Sender: news <mitchellbarry@example.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hello, No it's the contrary. The NPE doesn't happen despite the call to clearCaches(). The clearCaches() call solves the problem. In other words, without that call the NPE happens. The problem is probably as you suggest in your 3th paragraph here below. Koen From fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com Fri Feb 02 08:51:55 2007 Return-Path: <fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com> Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 36417 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2007 08:51:54 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Feb 2007 08:51:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 10850 invoked by uid 500); 2 Feb 2007 08:52:00 -0000 Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 10810 invoked by uid 500); 2 Feb 2007 08:52:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mitchellbarry@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Id: <fop-dev.xmlgraphics.apache.org> Reply-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 10793 invoked by uid 99); 2 Feb 2007 08:52:00 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Feb 2007 00:52:00 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO tux17.hoststar.ch) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Feb 2007 00:51:50 -0800 Received: from [83.161.120.155] (adsl-84-226-42-232.adslplus.ch [83.161.120.155]) (authenticated bits=0) by tux17.hoststar.ch (8.13.6/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l128pT62029258 for <mitchellbarry@example.com>; Fri, 2 Feb 2007 09:51:30 +0100 Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 09:51:36 +0100 From: Jeremias Maerki <mitchellbarry@example.com> To: mitchellbarry@example.com Subject: Re: Forcing Xerces/Xalan parsers in JVM In-Reply-To: <mitchellbarry@example.com> References: <mitchellbarry@example.com> Message-Id: <mitchellbarry@example.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Becky! ver. 2.28.01 [en] X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 000709-2, 01.02.2007), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 02.02.2007 01:09:06 Jeff Vannest wrote: > I've embedded FOP 0.93 in an Oracle AS 10g (9.0.4) Reports pluggable > destination, which itself is implemented as a J2EE application. Therefore= , > FOP is called as part of the already-running J2EE environment. >=20 > The problem that I'm having is that the Oracle XML parser blows chunks an= d > won't properly parse documents in order for FOP to work correctly. I have > everything working properly as long as I put Xerces and Xml-apis in the > pre-boot class path (e.g. "-Xbootclasspath^/p:...") and specifying Xalan = as > the TransformFactory (e.g. "... > -Djavax.xml.transform.TransformerFactory=3Dorg.apache.xalan.processor.Tra= nsfor > merFactoryImpl). >=20 > However, although this configuration works perfectly, Oracle has > specifically declared that it will not be supported. Basically if > Xerces/Xalan ever blows up Oracle Reports, our enterprise's million dolla= r > support contract is worthless. If you look how many more problems Oracle produces than Xerces/Xalan on our user mailing list, I'd rather be worried that the Oracle XML libraries cost you the million dollar contract rather than Xerces/Xalan. ;-) It's a simple fact that Oracle's XML code has some nasty very long-standing bugs. Many people fixed their problems by switching the JAXP implementation and it seems it is what you had to do, too. Obviously, the best way would be to have Oracle fix their bugs. It feels like the weakest of the parties has to work around the problems. I wonder if anyone has ever bothered to file those bugs with Oracle. Just ranting... > Soooooooooooo... Question: Is there any other way to force FOP to use th= e > Xalan transformer factory without overriding it for the entire Oracle > Reports application? I may even be allowed the time and resources to crea= te > a FOP patch in order to make this modification if required. Not at the moment, but I guess it's not a bad idea. We could create a factory class that serves as the global creator for all (SAX)TransformerFactory and SAXParserFactory instances within FOP. If noone sets anything special we use the default implementation or else you could set the class names there. I don't think it is easily possible to do this in FopFactory but doing this in a global way in this particular case doesn't seem bad to me. The only problem I see is that we need to keep some degree of discipline throughout the code to get the factory through that class instead of getting the default JAXP factory. Something like: public class FopJAXPFactory { public SAXTransformerFactory newSAXTransformerFactory() {... public TransformerFactory newTransformerFactory() {... public SAXParserFactory newSAXParserFactory() {... public void setTransformerFactory(String className) {... public void setSAXParserFactory(String className) {... } Optionally, two FOP-specific system properties for the (SAX)TransformerFactory and the SAXParserFactory. Or maybe we should call the class FopWorksAroundOracleBugsJAXPFactory. hehe. Sorry, I couldn't help it. What does everyone think?=20 > As always, thank you in advance for your thoughts. >=20 > Jeff >=20 >=20 Jeremias Maerki From fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com Fri Feb 02 11:53:30 2007 Return-Path: <fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com> Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 86488 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2007 11:53:30 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Feb 2007 11:53:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 25059 invoked by uid 500); 2 Feb 2007 11:53:35 -0000 Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 25040 invoked by uid 500); 2 Feb 2007 11:53:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mitchellbarry@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Id: <fop-dev.xmlgraphics.apache.org> Reply-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 25029 invoked by uid 99); 2 Feb 2007 11:53:34 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Feb 2007 03:53:34 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-9.4 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,NO_REAL_NAME,UPPERCASE_25_50 X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Feb 2007 03:53:28 -0800 Received: by brutus.apache.org (Postfix, from userid 33) id CBC107141A3; Fri, 2 Feb 2007 03:53:07 -0800 (PST) From: mitchellbarry@example.com To: mitchellbarry@example.com Subject: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41514] - [PATCH] Strict url validation of user config In-Reply-To: <mitchellbarry@example.com/bugzilla/> X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo Message-Id: <mitchellbarry@example.com> Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 03:53:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41514>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41514 mitchellbarry@example.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #19492|0 |1 is obsolete| | ------- Additional Comments From mitchellbarry@example.com 2007-02-02 03:53 ------- (From update of attachment 19492) This patch attachment has been superceeded -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. From fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com Fri Feb 02 11:56:12 2007 Return-Path: <fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com> Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 87433 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2007 11:56:11 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Feb 2007 11:56:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 32375 invoked by uid 500); 2 Feb 2007 11:56:17 -0000 Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 32348 invoked by uid 500); 2 Feb 2007 11:56:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mitchellbarry@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Id: <fop-dev.xmlgraphics.apache.org> Reply-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 32337 invoked by uid 99); 2 Feb 2007 11:56:16 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Feb 2007 03:56:16 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-9.4 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,NO_REAL_NAME X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Feb 2007 03:56:10 -0800 Received: by brutus.apache.org (Postfix, from userid 33) id B4BE97141A3; Fri, 2 Feb 2007 03:55:49 -0800 (PST) From: mitchellbarry@example.com To: mitchellbarry@example.com Subject: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41514] - [PATCH] Strict url validation of user config In-Reply-To: <mitchellbarry@example.com/bugzilla/> X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo Message-Id: <mitchellbarry@example.com> Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 03:55:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41514>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41514 ------- Additional Comments From mitchellbarry@example.com 2007-02-02 03:55 ------- Created an attachment (id=19497) --> (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19497&action=view) main patch file (In reply to comment #3) > The patch is fairly large and seems to address more than only validation of the > configuration file. Can you give a summary? The patch seems quite large because I have added a new suite of configuration unit tests for the fix (these are contained in the attached zip file). A summary of the changes is given below. > I am against this exception being thrown if I do not use the font arial at all: > > [ERROR] FOP - Exception > <org.apache.avalon.framework.configuration.ConfigurationException: Failed to > resolve font metric-url > 'arial.xml'>org.apache.avalon.framework.configuration.ConfigurationException: > Failed to resolve font metric-url 'arial.xml' In order for this to be the case, the user configuration would have to be (re-)read/parsed at the runtime of the rendering operation in order that it would be able to know if a particular font is being used in the given FO file. This would be an inefficient way of doing things and would require some structural changes. > I am also against combining strict validation of the FO file and the user > configuration; they are two different things. I would appreciate a separate > option 'validate-configuration', which checks every entry in the configuration file. > I did raise this as a question on forum and I remember you responded to it. http://www.nabble.com/Bad-FOP-configurations-tf3064300.html#a8522251 Chris Bowditch suggested that it be combined with "strict-validation". I can see your argument for this and this was my original idea but I can also see Chris' argument too. On balance I have decided to go with your suggestion and make it separate a separate configuration option so as to not cause any confusion. I have introduced a new configuration variable called "strict-configuration". I haven't called it "validate-configuration" because validation should always occur, its how the resulting error is handled that is the important thing (see Andreas' comments from the thread). If "strict-configuration" == "false" then FOP will simply log the error and continue to parse the user configuration. If "strict-configuration" == "true" then FOP will immediately raise an exception and will not continue trying to configure itself. I have attached a new patch file containing these changes (this includes related documentation changes). This new patch file superceeds the previous one. Kind regards, Adrian Cumiskey. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. From fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com Fri Feb 02 12:03:26 2007 Return-Path: <fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com> Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 89450 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2007 12:03:26 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Feb 2007 12:03:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 41570 invoked by uid 500); 2 Feb 2007 12:03:31 -0000 Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 41542 invoked by uid 500); 2 Feb 2007 12:03:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mitchellbarry@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Id: <fop-dev.xmlgraphics.apache.org> Reply-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 41531 invoked by uid 99); 2 Feb 2007 12:03:31 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Feb 2007 04:03:31 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-9.4 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,NO_REAL_NAME,UPPERCASE_25_50 X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Feb 2007 04:03:24 -0800 Received: by brutus.apache.org (Postfix, from userid 33) id 755F37141A3; Fri, 2 Feb 2007 04:03:03 -0800 (PST) From: mitchellbarry@example.com To: mitchellbarry@example.com Subject: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41514] - [PATCH] Strict url validation of user config In-Reply-To: <mitchellbarry@example.com/bugzilla/> X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo Message-Id: <mitchellbarry@example.com> Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 04:03:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41514>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41514 mitchellbarry@example.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #19497|0 |1 is obsolete| | ------- Additional Comments From mitchellbarry@example.com 2007-02-02 04:03 ------- Created an attachment (id=19498) --> (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19498&action=view) main patch file Includes relevant changes to site (xdocs) documentation. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. From fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com Fri Feb 02 21:43:31 2007 Return-Path: <fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com> Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 14051 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2007 21:43:30 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Feb 2007 21:43:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 2696 invoked by uid 500); 2 Feb 2007 21:43:36 -0000 Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 2671 invoked by uid 500); 2 Feb 2007 21:43:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mitchellbarry@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Id: <fop-dev.xmlgraphics.apache.org> Reply-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 2660 invoked by uid 99); 2 Feb 2007 21:43:35 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Feb 2007 13:43:35 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-9.4 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,NO_REAL_NAME,UPPERCASE_25_50 X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Feb 2007 13:43:28 -0800 Received: by brutus.apache.org (Postfix, from userid 33) id 6F03B7141F2; Fri, 2 Feb 2007 13:43:08 -0800 (PST) From: mitchellbarry@example.com To: mitchellbarry@example.com Subject: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41532] New: - Bookmark Links are not working properly... Message-ID: <{{EMAIL+PHONE}}/bugzilla/> X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 13:43:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41532>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41532 Summary: Bookmark Links are not working properly... Product: Fop Version: 0.93 Platform: All OS/Version: other Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: P2 Component: pdf AssignedTo: mitchellbarry@example.com ReportedBy: mitchellbarry@example.com I tried to create a PDF file from pdfoutline.fo file that is being shipped with the FOP0.93v. It generated the PDF file successfully. But when I click on the bookmarks' links, it's not displaying the content (of that link) on top of the page. Is it a known issue? Or do I need to configure something to make it work? -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. From fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com Sat Feb 03 21:16:59 2007 Return-Path: <fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com> Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 67972 invoked from network); 3 Feb 2007 21:16:58 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Feb 2007 21:16:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 24551 invoked by uid 500); 3 Feb 2007 21:17:04 -0000 Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 24529 invoked by uid 500); 3 Feb 2007 21:17:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mitchellbarry@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Id: <fop-dev.xmlgraphics.apache.org> Reply-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 24518 invoked by uid 99); 3 Feb 2007 21:17:04 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-9.4 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,NO_REAL_NAME,UPPERCASE_25_50 X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 03 Feb 2007 13:17:03 -0800 Received: by brutus.apache.org (Postfix, from userid 33) id 1342171429F; Sat, 3 Feb 2007 13:16:06 -0800 (PST) From: mitchellbarry@example.com To: mitchellbarry@example.com Subject: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41532] - Bookmark Links are not working properly... In-Reply-To: <{{EMAIL+PHONE}}/bugzilla/> X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo Message-Id: <mitchellbarry@example.com> Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2007 13:16:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41532>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41532 ------- Additional Comments From mitchellbarry@example.com 2007-02-03 13:16 ------- Confirmed. The jump is made only when the bookmark's destination is not on the current page. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. From fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com Sat Feb 03 22:57:48 2007 Return-Path: <fop-dev-returnmitchellbarry@example.com> Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 77952 invoked from network); 3 Feb 2007 22:57:48 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Feb 2007 22:57:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 76079 invoked by uid 500); 3 Feb 2007 22:57:53 -0000 Delivered-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 76061 invoked by uid 500); 3 Feb 2007 22:57:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mitchellbarry@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:mitchellbarry@example.com> List-Id: <fop-dev.xmlgraphics.apache.org> Reply-To: mitchellbarry@example.com Delivered-To: mailing list mitchellbarry@example.com Received: (qmail 76050 invoked by uid 99); 3 Feb 2007 22:57:52 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-9.4
{'source': 'Apache Software Foundation Public Mail Archives'}