--- Comment #15 from 2011-02-21 04:19:14 EST ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> (In reply to comment #13)
> > > The minimal test case must be wrong. The output is the same with or 
> > > without the
> > > patch and it behaves normally, ie rows are displayed were they should.
> > 
> > Which test case are you referring to exactly? I checked all attachments 
> > before
> > and after the patch. 
> It just occurred to me that, if you mean the 'slightly altered' test case, you
> may want to read comment 5 more closely. It is expected to produce the same
> result before and after. More a reference sample to be able to see the
> difference during debugging.

I am sorry Andreas, I am not an expert in fop internals, so my response might
have been too fast (and wrong) and it created some confusion.

I was under the impression, that the minimal test case (by Jeremias) manifested
the same behavior as Adam's original sample. The result I got from minimal,
with and without, the patch is identical. So, I guess this test case does not
expose the problem. I haven't tested with your revised (Slightly Altered) test,
and I was not referring to it.. 

As for the other bug, it is my mistake, I was referring to bug,  which is still open
and is a totally different case.

I am sorry again for the misunderstanding.


Configure bugmail:
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.

Reply via email to