Re: Bug#859660: Bug#859660: artemis running issue
Dear Andreas. I put here the results of the commands. Home that helps... $ sudo update-binfmts --display jarwrapper update-binfmts: warning: jarwrapper not in database of installed binary formats. update-binfmts: exiting due to previous errors $ sudo update-binfmts --display jar update-binfmts: warning: jar not in database of installed binary formats. update-binfmts: exiting due to previous errors Thanks ! Regards Le 06/05/2017 à 00:16, Andreas Tille a écrit : Control: severity -1 important Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Tony, On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 08:11:52AM -0700, tony mancill wrote: This does sound like an issue we had in the past with jarwrapper and binfmt-support. IIRC, Colin Watson was able to track down the source of this, but at the moment I cannot locate the details of that exchange. It was something along the lines of there being multiple interpreters registered for the given binfmt. Thanks for ths info. If we know that the user's kernel supports binfmt_misc, then we should be able to figure out what's happening. The output of "sudo update-binfmts --display jarwrapper" (should point to jarwrapper) and "sudo update-binfmts --display jar" (should point to jexec) might be informative. I'll try to reproduce locally and report back. I've reduced the severity of this bug from grave to important and have added the tag moreinfo. Jerome, could you please provide the said info? Kind regards Andreas. -- -- Jérôme L'oisiveté est, dit-on, la mère de tous les vices, mais l'excès de travail est le père de toutes les soumissions. (Albert Jacquard)
Re: Bug#859660: Bug#859660: artemis running issue
Dear Andreas. Thank's a lot for your questions and remark. This will help me to detect where was the problem. And i apologize that teh error is generated during the creation of a live debian iso file. As the error wa detected in the live itself, i send the report as this.. Forgetting that i'm in a live session. You're bug system is too perfect, as it permit report bugs in a live session! The problem was detected and corrected in the binfmt-support bug (#750245). So i'm declaring this issue corrected, as this from another problem. Regards Le 09/05/2017 à 05:19, Andreas Tille a écrit : Hi Jerome, On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 01:42:40PM -0500, Jerome wrote: I put here the results of the commands. Home that helps... I think so since it confirms the expected reason for the issue you observed. $ sudo update-binfmts --display jarwrapper update-binfmts: warning: jarwrapper not in database of installed binary formats. update-binfmts: exiting due to previous errors $ sudo update-binfmts --display jar update-binfmts: warning: jar not in database of installed binary formats. update-binfmts: exiting due to previous errors I have access to two different boxes, one running Jessie (stable): $ sudo update-binfmts --display jarwrapper [sudo] password for tillea: jarwrapper (enabled): package = type = magic offset = 0 magic = PK\x03\x04 mask = interpreter = /usr/bin/jarwrapper detector = /usr/bin/jardetector $ sudo update-binfmts --display jar jar (enabled): package = openjdk-7 type = magic offset = 0 magic = PK\x03\x04 mask = interpreter = /usr/bin/jexec detector = and one running Stretch (testing): $ sudo update-binfmts --display jarwrapper jarwrapper (enabled): package = jarwrapper type = magic offset = 0 magic = PK\x03\x04 mask = interpreter = /usr/bin/jarwrapper detector = /usr/bin/jardetector $ sudo update-binfmts --display jar jar (enabled): package = openjdk-7 type = magic offset = 0 magic = PK\x03\x04 mask = interpreter = /usr/bin/jexec detector = Could you please post the result of apt-cache policy jarwrapper make sure it is installed sudo apt-get install jarwrapper and try again? If artemis works afterwards the solution would be to add jarwrapper to the dependencies (hmmm, I somehow assumed that this would be the case but its not. :-() Thanks for your patience Andreas. -- -- Jérôme L'homme, cet insecte invisible, rampant dans les sillons d'un globe imperceptible (Lamartine, L'infini dans les cieux)
Re: libjopendocument-java build failures after repack
On 20/06/2014 13:43, Pirate Praveen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This packaged had many jar files embedded in it and it was
> building fine. But after removing the embedded jars and adding them
> in build-deps, there is one build error now [I might have missed
> adding some jars, but previous build errors where helpful to find
> which jar is missing).
>
> Can anyone help here? This is my first java package and I don't
> know java (I have learned it years ago in college but never used it
> in any serious projects).
>
> It is already added to team repo. You'll have to run a
> pristine-tar checkout to create a orig.tar.gz and use
> dpkg-buildpackage to build it as git-buildpackage doesn't run clean
> after patching.
> (https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=752165)
>
> Thanks Praveen
>
> [javac]
> /home/pravi/forge/debian/git/pkg-java/libjopendocument-java/src/org/jopendocument/util/CollectionMap.java:199:
>
>
cannot find symbol
> [javac] symbol : method remove(K,V) [javac] location: class
> org.jopendocument.util.CollectionMap [javac]
> this.remove(e.getKey(), e.getValue()); [javac]
>
Hi Praveen,
According to:
http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/pkg-java/trunk/libcommons-collections3-java/debian/patches/java8-compatibility.patch?view=markup
MultiHashMap.remove has been renamed to MultiHashMap.removeMapping so
adding a patch with:
@@ -196,7 +196,7 @@ public class CollectionMap extends
MultiHashMap {
public void removeAll(Map m) {
for (final Map.Entry e :
m.entrySet()) {
-this.remove(e.getKey(), e.getValue());
+this.removeMapping(e.getKey(), e.getValue());
}
}
should help.
Jerome
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53a44e15.1020...@gmx.com
Re: libjopendocument-java build failures after repack
On 20/06/2014 17:07, Jerome Robert wrote:
> On 20/06/2014 13:43, Pirate Praveen wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This packaged had many jar files embedded in it and it was
>> building fine. But after removing the embedded jars and adding them
>> in build-deps, there is one build error now [I might have missed
>> adding some jars, but previous build errors where helpful to find
>> which jar is missing).
>>
>> Can anyone help here? This is my first java package and I don't
>> know java (I have learned it years ago in college but never used it
>> in any serious projects).
>>
>> It is already added to team repo. You'll have to run a
>> pristine-tar checkout to create a orig.tar.gz and use
>> dpkg-buildpackage to build it as git-buildpackage doesn't run clean
>> after patching.
>> (https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=752165)
>>
>> Thanks Praveen
>>
>> [javac]
>> /home/pravi/forge/debian/git/pkg-java/libjopendocument-java/src/org/jopendocument/util/CollectionMap.java:199:
>>
>>
> cannot find symbol
>> [javac] symbol : method remove(K,V) [javac] location: class
>> org.jopendocument.util.CollectionMap [javac]
>> this.remove(e.getKey(), e.getValue()); [javac]
>>
>
> Hi Praveen,
>
> According to:
>
> http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/pkg-java/trunk/libcommons-collections3-java/debian/patches/java8-compatibility.patch?view=markup
>
> MultiHashMap.remove has been renamed to MultiHashMap.removeMapping so
> adding a patch with:
>
> @@ -196,7 +196,7 @@ public class CollectionMap extends
> MultiHashMap {
>
> public void removeAll(Map m) {
> for (final Map.Entry e :
> m.entrySet()) {
> -this.remove(e.getKey(), e.getValue());
> +this.removeMapping(e.getKey(), e.getValue());
> }
> }
>
> should help.
>
Yet it won't build because of:
/tmp/libjopendocument-java/src/org/jopendocument/dom/Library.java:649: error:
name clash: canBeMerged(Map,Map) in EmbeddedLibrary and
canBeMerged(Map,Map) in Library have the same
erasure, yet neither hides the other
static private final boolean canBeMerged(final Map m1,
final Map m2) {
^
where V is a type-variable:
V extends Object declared in method
canBeMerged(Map,Map)
/home/jerome/libjopendocument-java/src/org/jopendocument/util/CollectionMap.java:199:
error: no suitable method found for remove(K,V)
this.remove(e.getKey(), e.getValue());
^
method CollectionMap.remove(Object) is not applicable
(actual and formal argument lists differ in length)
method HashMap.remove(Object) is not applicable
(actual and formal argument lists differ in length)
method AbstractMap.remove(Object) is not applicable
(actual and formal argument lists differ in length)
where K,V are type-variables:
K extends Object declared in class CollectionMap
V extends Object declared in class CollectionMap
which is triggered by this fix:
http://bugs.java.com/view_bug.do?bug_id=6182950
So you should add this patch:
--- a/src/org/jopendocument/dom/Library.java
+++ b/src/org/jopendocument/dom/Library.java
@@ -643,10 +643,10 @@ public abstract class Library {
final EmbeddedLibrary other = (EmbeddedLibrary) obj;
if (this.passwordProtected != other.passwordProtected)
return false;
-return canBeMerged(this.modules, other.modules) &&
canBeMerged(this.dialogs, other.dialogs);
+return canBeMergedImpl(this.modules, other.modules) &&
canBeMergedImpl(this.dialogs, other.dialogs);
}
-static private final boolean canBeMerged(final Map m1,
final Map m2) {
+static private final boolean canBeMergedImpl(final Map
m1, final Map m2) {
final Set duplicateKeys =
CollectionUtils.inter(m1.keySet(), m2.keySet());
for (final String key : duplicateKeys) {
final V v1 = m1.get(key);
Jerome
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53a4557b.2090...@gmx.com
Re: libjopendocument-java build failures after repack
On 20/06/2014 22:33, Pirate Praveen wrote: > > Thanks! Now it builds fine in my work environment, but fails in > pbuilder. The same error is repeated many times. I think we have to set > encoding to UTF-8, but not sure where to set it. > > [javac] > /tmp/buildd/libjopendocument-java-1.3repack/src/org/jopendocument/dom/ChildCreator.java:149: > error: unmappable character for encoding ASCII > [javac] * Trouve l'index ou il faut ins??rer le fils dans ce > document. > [javac] ^ > [javac] > /tmp/buildd/libjopendocument-java-1.3repack/src/org/jopendocument/dom/ChildCreator.java:149: > error: unmappable character for encoding ASCII > [javac] * Trouve l'index ou il faut ins??rer le fils dans ce > document. > [javac] > The upstream should probably do something like that (or even better, not writing comments in french :-) ): --- a/build.xml +++ b/build.xml @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ - + but I guess that in a packaging context this one, which avoid patching, is better: --- a/debian/rules +++ b/debian/rules @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ # Uncomment this to turn on verbose mode. #export DH_VERBOSE=1 export JAVA_HOME=/usr/lib/jvm/default-java +export ANT_OPTS=-Dfile.encoding=utf-8 %: dh $@ --with javahelper Jerome -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53a52b52.8070...@gmx.com
Re: batik-libs ?
On 15/07/2015 11:47, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: > > From my understanding batik-libs would be equivalent to loading each > and every batik-* components. If so this means I broke something when > updating to batik 1.8. Could someone with more batik experience > please double check my batik package (check svn) and tell me what I > did wrong ? Hello Mathieu, The current batik 1.8 package batik-libs.jar, batik.jar, batik-all.jar and batik-1.8.jar are dead link. Here is a possible reason: debian/rules assume that the upstream jar name is batik-1.8/lib/batik-libs.jar but if you look at the build.xml: it should be batik-1.8/lib/batik-libs-1.8.jar Jerome (from Toulouse) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/55a6ac1e.1090...@gmx.com
java-package: quid javafx-1.3.1 ?
Hello Forum: Is there a room for javax-1.3.1 in java-package ? Thanks in advance, Jerome
Re: java-package: quid javafx-1.3.1 ?
Hi: On 13/08/15 23:10, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > Le 13/08/2015 18:23, Jerome BENOIT a écrit : > >> Is there a room for javax-1.3.1 in java-package ? > > Hi Jerome, > > We have JavaFX 8 in Debian, why do you need the old version 1.3.1? Because some Java software still use it. The Java material I have in mind is indeed migrating to JavaFX 8 as it does to OpenJDK 8, but meanwhile it depends on both Oracle JDK 7 and JavaFX 1.3.1. According to this web site http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javafx/overview/javafx-131-redistribution-1942678.html , its last update was in May 2013: is it that old ? Thanks, Jerome > > Emmanuel Bourg >
jPedal / JavaFX PDF Viewer
Hello Forum: I am considering to package jPedal [0,1], or at least to change to ITP the un-activated RFP #547142 [2]. Before all, I surprise that it was not yet brought to Debian: is ther any good reason for that ? Thanks, Jerome [0] https://www.idrsolutions.com/openviewerfx/ [1] http://sourceforge.net/projects/openviewerfx/?source=typ_redirect [2] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=547142
Re: jPedal / JavaFX PDF Viewer
Hi: Thanks for your reply. On 08/09/15 17:57, Markus Koschany wrote: > Am 08.09.2015 um 17:24 schrieb Jerome BENOIT: >> Hello Forum: >> >> I am considering to package jPedal [0,1], or at least to change to ITP the >> un-activated RFP #547142 [2]. >> Before all, I surprise that it was not yet brought to Debian: is ther any >> good reason for that ? >> > > Hi, > > I'm not aware of any major blockers beside the usual "someone has to do > the work thing". However be careful jPedal is the commercial non-free > version, so the package should be called openviewerfx, after the free > version. I am on my way to package it. Thanks, Jerome > > Regards, > > Markus > >
Re: jPedal / JavaFX PDF Viewer: jsonevil
Hello List: On 08/09/15 17:57, Markus Koschany wrote: > Am 08.09.2015 um 17:24 schrieb Jerome BENOIT: >> Hello Forum: >> >> I am considering to package jPedal [0,1], or at least to change to ITP the >> un-activated RFP #547142 [2]. >> Before all, I surprise that it was not yet brought to Debian: is ther any >> good reason for that ? >> > > Hi, > > I'm not aware of any major blockers beside the usual "someone has to do > the work thing". However be careful jPedal is the commercial non-free > version, so the package should be called openviewerfx, after the free > version. It appears that openviewerfx contains the JSon non-free license, a kind of [1]. I tried to get ride of it by substituting it with libandroid-json-org-java which provides part of it: The workaround partially works, but unfortunately org.json.JSONWriter is needed (but not provided by the android alternative). Any idea on how to fix this issue ? Thanks, Jerome > > Regards, > > Markus [1] https://wiki.debian.org/qa.debian.org/jsonevil > >
Re: jPedal / JavaFX PDF Viewer: jsonevil
Hello List: On 18/10/15 17:34, Markus Koschany wrote: > Am 17.10.2015 um 17:30 schrieb Jerome BENOIT: > [...] > >> It appears that openviewerfx contains the JSon non-free license, a kind of >> [1]. >> I tried to get ride of it by substituting it with libandroid-json-org-java >> which provides part of it: >> The workaround partially works, but unfortunately org.json.JSONWriter is >> needed (but not provided by >> the android alternative). Any idea on how to fix this issue ? > > Hi Jerome, > > I found > > https://android.googlesource.com/platform/frameworks/base/+/master/core/java/android/util/JsonWriter.java > > https://sources.debian.net/src/openjfx/8u60-b27-4/modules/jmx/src/main/java/com/oracle/javafx/jmx/json/JSONWriter.java/ > > Perhaps you could use one of these classes? It appears not compatible. Nay, meanwhile the upstream maintainer team got read of this json evil files. So, I can continue the pacakging. Thanks, Jerome > > Regards, > > Markus >
Re: Working with JavaFX
Hello Forum: On 06/12/15 17:17, Cecil Westerhof wrote: > I want to start writing desktop applications. I have done some (but > not much) Swing and Qt in the past, but as I understand it I should > use JavaFX nowadays. How should I install JavaFX? I am using Java 7, > because I do not want to use unstable packages without a reason and > at the moment I think Java 7 is good enough. (At my work I need to > use Java 6.) I understood that JavaFX should be installed with Java, > bit it is not. Which version ? > > -- Cecil Westerhof Jerome
Fwd: Bug#808782: RFS: jpedal4-lgpl [ITP] Java PDF Extraction Decoding Access Library (LGPL4)
Forwarded Message Subject: Bug#808782: RFS: jpedal4-lgpl [ITP] Java PDF Extraction Decoding Access Library (LGPL4) Resent-Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 21:21:02 + Resent-From: Jerome Benoit Resent-To: debian-bugs-d...@lists.debian.org Resent-CC: Debian Mentors Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 22:18:30 +0100 From: Jerome Benoit Reply-To: Jerome Benoit , 808...@bugs.debian.org To: Debian Bug Tracking System Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear Mentors: I am looking for a sponsor for the packages jpedal4-lgpl, a wide used Java library that allows one to manipulate PDF material. The concerned version of jpedal is actually frozen, but it is still wildly used because of its license. Thanks, Jerome -- System Information: Debian Release: Jessie* APT prefers stable APT policy: (990, 'stable'), (500, 'stable-updates') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 3.16.7-ckt11-amd64-mbp62 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_GB.utf8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Init: sysvinit (via /sbin/init)
Fwd: Bug#808783: RFS: openviewerfx [ITP] Open Source JavaFX PDF Viewer
Forwarded Message Subject: Bug#808783: RFS: openviewerfx [ITP] Open Source JavaFX PDF Viewer Resent-Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 21:48:02 + Resent-From: Jerome Benoit Resent-To: debian-bugs-d...@lists.debian.org Resent-CC: Debian Mentors Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 22:45:34 +0100 From: Jerome Benoit Reply-To: Jerome Benoit , 808...@bugs.debian.org To: Debian Bug Tracking System Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear Mentors: I am looking for a sponsor for the package openviewerfx [1], a Java library to manipulate PDF material (which is the successor of the jpedal java library). Thanks, Jerome [1] http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-java/openviewerfx.git -- System Information: Debian Release: Jessie* APT prefers stable APT policy: (990, 'stable'), (500, 'stable-updates') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 3.16.7-ckt11-amd64-mbp62 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_GB.utf8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Init: sysvinit (via /sbin/init)
