Re: [dsi-list] Re: Looking for the right Java solution
On Sat, 2005-02-26 at 23:31 +0100, Ivo Marino wrote: > Well then, I'll try to go my way using the free alternatives. Eventually > I'll send in some feedback if something should not work as expected. > Hello folks, Some time ago I've asked about "the right Java solution" on Debian platforms. In the meantime I made some progress and started to code some "example" Java applications in order to start learning Java. The code I'm writing and testing is being compiled with free-java-sdk which works fine, documentation is being generated with gjdoc which I've installed from sid on my testing system (the testing version was old). By the way: Another developer is also using free-java-sdk, but on Ubuntu Warty and it seems to work as well as on Debian. At this point I have some more questions regarding the Java API documentation. While coding it would be very useful to have the Java API documentation always available "offline" in the browser, does Debian provide such a documentation package related to free-java-sdk? I've tried to take a look around but found nothing. I would like to avoid using the "third-part" Sun Java documentation API. A "devhelp-book-java" Debian package for devhelp would also be useful but actually such a package does not seem to be available. Thanks in advance for any help. Best regards, I. P.S.: I'm off-list so please Cc: me, thanks. -- .''`. Ivo Marino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' : irc.FreeNode.net chan #debian-mentors `. ``UIN 32463141 + JID [EMAIL PROTECTED] `- Homepage http://mentors.debian.net/~eim/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [dsi-list] Re: Looking for the right Java solution
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 11:47:59AM +0100, Ivo Marino wrote: > On Sat, 2005-02-26 at 23:31 +0100, Ivo Marino wrote: > > > Well then, I'll try to go my way using the free alternatives. Eventually > > I'll send in some feedback if something should not work as expected. > > > Hello folks, > > Some time ago I've asked about "the right Java solution" on Debian platforms. > In the meantime I made some progress and started to code some "example" > Java applications in order to start learning Java. > > The code I'm writing and testing is being compiled with free-java-sdk > which works fine, documentation is being generated with gjdoc which I've > installed from sid on my testing system (the testing version was old). > > By the way: Another developer is also using free-java-sdk, but on Ubuntu > Warty and it seems to work as well as on Debian. > > At this point I have some more questions regarding the Java API > documentation. While coding it would be very useful to have the Java API > documentation always available "offline" in the browser, does Debian > provide such a documentation package related to free-java-sdk? I've > tried to take a look around but found nothing. I would like to avoid > using the "third-part" Sun Java documentation API. > > A "devhelp-book-java" Debian package for devhelp would also be useful > but actually such a package does not seem to be available. classpath-doc will contain the API docs for classpath in the future. They are not in there because of a bug in kaffe using too much memory when running gjdoc. This does not happen with gcj-4.0 but this is not in unstable yet. Providing a devhelp-book-java package might be useful too. Can you please file a wishlist bug for this ? Thanks, Michael -- Java Trap: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dsi-po-list] Re: [dsi-list] Re: Looking for the right Java solution
On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 12:20 +0100, Michael Koch wrote: > classpath-doc will contain the API docs for classpath in the future. > They are not in there because of a bug in kaffe using too much memory > when running gjdoc. This does not happen with gcj-4.0 but this is not in > unstable yet. > I understand. It seems that for the only alternative are teh Sun's API docs[1]. Thanks for the making some clearness. > Providing a devhelp-book-java package might be useful too. Can you > please file a wishlist bug for this ? > Done. I'll add a copy of my posted bug[2] report to this email. > Thanks, > > Michael > Thanks once again for your feedback. Best regards, I. [1] http://java.sun.com/docs/ [2] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=devhelp -- .''`. Ivo Marino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' : irc.FreeNode.net chan #debian-mentors `. ``UIN 32463141 + JID [EMAIL PROTECTED] `- Homepage http://mentors.debian.net/~eim/ Subject: A devhelp-book-java2 package would be useful Package: devhelp Severity: wishlist *** Please type your report below this line *** After a short discussion on the debian-java@lists.debian.org mailing list we came to the conclusion that a devhelp-book-java2 package could be quite interesting and useful during the Java development process. Actually the only alternative are the online Sun Java API specifications[1]. Thanks in advance for considering such a package package. I. [1] http://java.sun.com/docs/ -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.8-1-686 Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US (charmap=ISO-8859-1) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [dsi-po-list] Re: [dsi-list] Re: Looking for the right Java solution
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 01:01:02PM +0100, Ivo Marino wrote: > On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 12:20 +0100, Michael Koch wrote: > > > classpath-doc will contain the API docs for classpath in the future. > > They are not in there because of a bug in kaffe using too much memory > > when running gjdoc. This does not happen with gcj-4.0 but this is not in > > unstable yet. > > > I understand. It seems that for the only alternative are teh Sun's API > docs[1]. Thanks for the making some clearness. If you wanna use online docs please use http://developer.classpath.org/doc/ and report anything that can be made better back to classpath. > > > Providing a devhelp-book-java package might be useful too. Can you > > please file a wishlist bug for this ? > > > Done. I'll add a copy of my posted bug[2] report to this email. Urgh, the bug has to be against classpath, not devhelp. Michael -- Java Trap: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dsi-po-list] Re: [dsi-list] Re: Looking for the right Java solution
On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 13:12 +0100, Michael Koch wrote: > If you wanna use online docs please use > http://developer.classpath.org/doc/ and report anything that can be made > better back to classpath. > Ok, fine. Thanks. > Urgh, the bug has to be against classpath, not devhelp. > I could fill a second bug report against classpath if you prefer. The bug report against is, unfortunately, already out. > Michael > Regards, I. P.S. I'm off-list, please Cc: me, thanks. -- .''`. Ivo Marino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' : irc.FreeNode.net chan #debian-mentors `. ``UIN 32463141 + JID [EMAIL PROTECTED] `- Homepage http://mentors.debian.net/~eim/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [dsi-po-list] Re: [dsi-list] Re: Looking for the right Java solution
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 01:21:22PM +0100, Ivo Marino wrote: > On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 13:12 +0100, Michael Koch wrote: > > > If you wanna use online docs please use > > http://developer.classpath.org/doc/ and report anything that can be made > > better back to classpath. > > > Ok, fine. Thanks. > > > Urgh, the bug has to be against classpath, not devhelp. > > > I could fill a second bug report against classpath if you prefer. > The bug report against is, unfortunately, already out. The submitter can move it to another package via command mail. See instructions on http://bugs.debian.org/. Michael -- Java Trap: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dsi-po-list] Re: [dsi-list] Re: Looking for the right Java solution
On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 13:23 +0100, Michael Koch wrote: > The submitter can move it to another package via command mail. See > instructions on http://bugs.debian.org/. > I've just sent a "reassign 298857 classpath" command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- I hope this works. > Michael > Regards, I. P.S. I'm off-list, please Cc: me, thanks. -- .''`. Ivo Marino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' : irc.FreeNode.net chan #debian-mentors `. ``UIN 32463141 + JID [EMAIL PROTECTED] `- Homepage http://mentors.debian.net/~eim/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [dsi-po-list] Re: [dsi-list] Re: Looking for the right Java solution
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 01:35:13PM +0100, Ivo Marino wrote: > On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 13:23 +0100, Michael Koch wrote: > > > The submitter can move it to another package via command mail. See > > instructions on http://bugs.debian.org/. > > > I've just sent a "reassign 298857 classpath" command to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- I hope this works. That's it. Thanks. Michael -- Java Trap: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#288009: batik 1.5.1 would break fop
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 06:22:19PM +0100, Wolfgang Baer wrote: > Hi, > > I prepared a package for the batik 1.5.1 upstream release. > However during testing the package I realized that batik 1.5.1 > breaks fop ! As far as I see no other packages depend on > libbatik-java. > > fop is currently not in testing although a valid candidate. > A "solution" to the problem would be to upgrade batik to 1.5.1 > and also to upload a new fop package with an embedded batik > library in the current version (with the affected Squiggle > class files removed from the library). > > What do you think ? I would prefer to just add a patch to fop to make it work with batik 1.5.1 and just depend on batik >= 1.5.1. Putting a second batik copy into fop should be avoided. Michael -- Java Trap: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#288009: batik 1.5.1 would break fop
Hi Michael, Michael Koch wrote: I would prefer to just add a patch to fop to make it work with batik 1.5.1 and just depend on batik >= 1.5.1. Putting a second batik copy into fop should be avoided. You are right - there is only one compile error - but I have absolutely no experience with awt programming. The error is in the org.apache.fop.svg.PDFTextPainter class in the method "protected Point2D paintACI(AttributedCharacterIterator aci, Graphics2D g2d, Point2D loc)" Stroke stroke = (Stroke)aci.getAttribute(GVTAttributedCharacterIterator.TextAttribute.STROKE); GVTAttributedCharacterIterator.TextAttribute.STROKE is no more existent in batik 1.5.1 - I found the following hint on the batik-dev list (please have a look): http://koala.ilog.fr/batik/mlists/batik-dev/archives/msg04290.html I therefore replaced it as said with TextPaintInfo pi = (TextPaintInfo)aci.getAttribute (GVTAttributedCharacterIterator.TextAttribute.PAINT_INFO); The Stroke instance is used later in this method: g2d.setStroke( stroke ); The TextPaintInfo class has several Stroke variables: public java.awt.Stroke strokeStroke; public java.awt.Stroke underlineStroke; public java.awt.Stroke overlineStroke; public java.awt.Stroke strikethroughStroke; Which one to use ? g2d.setStroke( pi.strokeStroke ); ?? As said, I have no knowledge with awt - so if anyone can provide the "right" solution I would prepare a new fop upload with the patch. A batik 1.5.1 is already prepared. Regards, Wolfgang -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#288009: batik 1.5.1 would break fop
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 10:28:08PM +0100, Wolfgang Baer wrote: > Hi Michael, > > Michael Koch wrote: > >I would prefer to just add a patch to fop to make it work with batik > >1.5.1 and just depend on batik >= 1.5.1. Putting a second batik copy > >into fop should be avoided. > > You are right - there is only one compile error - but I have absolutely > no experience with awt programming. > > The error is in the org.apache.fop.svg.PDFTextPainter class in the > method "protected Point2D paintACI(AttributedCharacterIterator aci, > Graphics2D g2d, Point2D loc)" > > Stroke stroke = > (Stroke)aci.getAttribute(GVTAttributedCharacterIterator.TextAttribute.STROKE); > > GVTAttributedCharacterIterator.TextAttribute.STROKE is no more existent > in batik 1.5.1 - I found the following hint on the batik-dev list > (please have a look): > > http://koala.ilog.fr/batik/mlists/batik-dev/archives/msg04290.html > > I therefore replaced it as said with > > TextPaintInfo pi = (TextPaintInfo)aci.getAttribute > (GVTAttributedCharacterIterator.TextAttribute.PAINT_INFO); > > The Stroke instance is used later in this method: > > g2d.setStroke( stroke ); > > The TextPaintInfo class has several Stroke variables: > > public java.awt.Stroke strokeStroke; > public java.awt.Stroke underlineStroke; > public java.awt.Stroke overlineStroke; > public java.awt.Stroke strikethroughStroke; > > Which one to use ? > > g2d.setStroke( pi.strokeStroke ); ?? > > As said, I have no knowledge with awt - so if anyone can provide > the "right" solution I would prepare a new fop upload with the > patch. A batik 1.5.1 is already prepared. Can you perhaps look into the old batik what value GVTAttributedCharacterIterator.TextAttribute.STROKE has ? What solution does fop CVS use ? (if they work with updated batik already). Michael -- Java Trap: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#288009: batik 1.5.1 would break fop
Michael Koch wrote: On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 10:28:08PM +0100, Wolfgang Baer wrote: Which one to use ? g2d.setStroke( pi.strokeStroke ); ?? As said, I have no knowledge with awt - so if anyone can provide the "right" solution I would prepare a new fop upload with the patch. A batik 1.5.1 is already prepared. Can you perhaps look into the old batik what value GVTAttributedCharacterIterator.TextAttribute.STROKE has ? What solution does fop CVS use ? (if they work with updated batik already). That was the hint I needed :-) fop is in a redesign phase - but I found something in the dead cvs section on the 0.20.2 maintainance branch. There is exactly the same patch shortly after batik 1.5.1 was released. If you want to have a look: http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/xml-fop/src/org/apache/fop/svg/ PDFTextPainter.java?hideattic=0&r1=1.7.2.4&r2=1.7.2.5&only_with_tag=fop-0_20_2-maintain They use the strokeStroke variable from TextPaintInfo. So I will start preparing the packages tomorrow. Thanks, Wolfgang -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#288009: batik 1.5.1 would break fop
Steve Langasek wrote: On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 06:22:19PM +0100, Wolfgang Baer wrote: >>fop is currently not in testing although a valid candidate. A "solution" to the problem would be to upgrade batik to 1.5.1 and also to upload a new fop package with an embedded batik library in the current version (with the affected Squiggle class files removed from the library). fop is not really a valid candidate, although it appears to be in grep-excuses. Both libfop-java and libfop-java-doc are uninstallable on their own right in unstable, because libfop-java depends on fop and fop conflicts with libfop-java. You can safely ignore this package for the time being... There was a small discussion on debian-java the last minutes. I will prepare a patched fop release which should compile against batik 1.5.1 Should therefore the libfop-java and libfop-java-doc binary packages removed in the new package ? I think they are transitional packages not needed anymore as fop is not in testing at all. Am I right ? (I CC debian-java for this binary package removal question) Regards, Wolfgang -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#288009: batik 1.5.1 would break fop
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 11:12:35PM +0100, Wolfgang Baer wrote: > Steve Langasek wrote: > >On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 06:22:19PM +0100, Wolfgang Baer wrote: > >>fop is currently not in testing although a valid candidate. > >>A "solution" to the problem would be to upgrade batik to 1.5.1 > >>and also to upload a new fop package with an embedded batik > >>library in the current version (with the affected Squiggle > >>class files removed from the library). > >fop is not really a valid candidate, although it appears to be in > >grep-excuses. Both libfop-java and libfop-java-doc are uninstallable on > >their own right in unstable, because libfop-java depends on fop and fop > >conflicts with libfop-java. You can safely ignore this package for the > >time > >being... > There was a small discussion on debian-java the last minutes. I will > prepare a patched fop release which should compile against batik 1.5.1 > Should therefore the libfop-java and libfop-java-doc binary packages > removed in the new package ? I think they are transitional packages > not needed anymore as fop is not in testing at all. Am I right ? I don't think there's any reason for transitional packages for a package that's only in unstable. It's the maintainer's call whether to have a transitional package, but this is *not* the way to do it: uninstallable packages are not allowed. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer signature.asc Description: Digital signature
