Re: [dev] OOo_2.3.0rc2_20070905 and Scripting Framework: were there any changes there ?
Hi Jürgen, yes, the way how extensions are loaded has changed a little bit. Related to this change the search of dependent jar becomes more important. Extensions are now loaded with their own classloader and you have to specify dependent jars in the manifest file of your extension jar. I see! I can assume that in your case your ext jar depends on some scripting framework jars and that they are not found automatically. As I am using the OOo scripting framework itself there is the dependeny to program/classes/ScriptFramework.jar, which is OOo's stock scripting framework. Sounds like a problem and we have to think about it. I am only guessing but it seems that we need something special handling for this kind of scripting extensions. Well, if the class loader honors all OOo supplied jars (i.e. all jars in the classes subdirectory) as previously, then this would not be a problem. How would I state OOo deployed jars in the manifest file (i.e. to point to program/classes/ScriptFramework.jar wherever the program dir resides on a filesystem? (Sorry, if this is a rooky question, but I have not stumbled over that yet, or my memory fades already... ;) ) you should submit an issue for that problem. Should I assign it to someone already? Thanks! ---rony P.S.: As a sidenote: it would be possible with the help of Apache's upcoming BSF 3.0 (in beta at the moment) to employ javax.script (introduced with Java 6) on earlier versions of Java (BSF 3.0 is compiled for Java 4). This would have the benefit that the number of usable scripting languages for OOo would be enhanced tremendeously. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev] OOo_2.3.0rc2_20070905 and Scripting Framework: were there any changes there ?
Hi Rony, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: Hi there, just installed RC2 and a scripting language extension for ooRexx (ScriptProviderForooRexx.jar) which was built for earlier versions of OOo (2.1, 2.2) and which works fine there. Installing it with the Extension Manger and alternatively with unopkg (either command line or with the gui option) brings up the following error message: Can not activate the factory for com.sun.star.script.framework.provider.oorexx.ScriptProviderForooRexx$_ScriptProviderForooRexx because java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: com/sun/star/script/framework/provider/ScriptProvider Closing all instances of OOo (also with a reboot) will always show ooRexx as an option on the Macro... menu item, but it is not possible to create, load or run ooRexx scripts. As nothing has changed in the script provider jar for ooRexx (it works on earlier versions) I was wondering whether there were any changes for OOo 2.3 in the Scripting framework area or in the way jars are found. yes, the way how extensions are loaded has changed a little bit. Related to this change the search of dependent jar becomes more important. Extensions are now loaded with their own classloader and you have to specify dependent jars in the manifest file of your extension jar. I can assume that in your case your ext jar depends on some scripting framework jars and that they are not found automatically. Sounds like a problem and we have to think about it. I am only guessing but it seems that we need something special handling for this kind of scripting extensions. you should submit an issue for that problem. Juergen TIA for any hints/insights, ---rony - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev] OOo_2.3.0rc2_20070905 and Scripting Framework: were there any changes there ?
Rony G. Flatscher wrote: Hi Jürgen, yes, the way how extensions are loaded has changed a little bit. Related to this change the search of dependent jar becomes more important. Extensions are now loaded with their own classloader and you have to specify dependent jars in the manifest file of your extension jar. I see! I can assume that in your case your ext jar depends on some scripting framework jars and that they are not found automatically. As I am using the OOo scripting framework itself there is the dependeny to program/classes/ScriptFramework.jar, which is OOo's stock scripting framework. Sounds like a problem and we have to think about it. I am only guessing but it seems that we need something special handling for this kind of scripting extensions. Well, if the class loader honors all OOo supplied jars (i.e. all jars in the classes subdirectory) as previously, then this would not be a problem. i don't remember the exact reason to use only a subset but i assume it was to start with a minimal set of necessary UNO jar files only instead of using all files which are most often never used or necessary. Maybe we can add the scripting framework jar as a first solution and can think about a better solution later. How would I state OOo deployed jars in the manifest file (i.e. to point to program/classes/ScriptFramework.jar wherever the program dir resides on a filesystem? (Sorry, if this is a rooky question, but I have not stumbled over that that is exactly the problem. Because you don't know exactly if your extension is deployed per user only or for all users of this installation. The necessary entry in the jar manifest file requires a relative path to dependent jars. yet, or my memory fades already... ;) ) you should submit an issue for that problem. Should I assign it to someone already? you can submit it to me jsc or better to Stephan Bergmann (sb) By the way you can add the scripting framework jar file manually to the classpath and can check if it works. Juergen Thanks! ---rony P.S.: As a sidenote: it would be possible with the help of Apache's upcoming BSF 3.0 (in beta at the moment) to employ javax.script (introduced with Java 6) on earlier versions of Java (BSF 3.0 is compiled for Java 4). This would have the benefit that the number of usable scripting languages for OOo would be enhanced tremendeously. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev] OOo_2.3.0rc2_20070905 and Scripting Framework: were there any changes there ?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, Juergen Schmidt wrote: How would I state OOo deployed jars in the manifest file (i.e. to point to program/classes/ScriptFramework.jar wherever the program dir resides on a filesystem? (Sorry, if this is a rooky question, but I have not stumbled over that that is exactly the problem. Because you don't know exactly if your extension is deployed per user only or for all users of this installation. Hmm. The necessary entry in the jar manifest file requires a relative path to dependent jars. If I know that it's deployed system-wide (because that's what http://packages.debian.org/openoffice.orgf-report-builder does), how do I specify the classpath then? Relative to what? /me has that problem with sun-report-design.oxt and jars not even built by the build process or stuff which will be used from the system anyway. The only solution I found so far is adding them to UNO_JFW_CLASSPATH_URLS because as you said, classes/ won't work. yet, or my memory fades already... ;) ) you should submit an issue for that problem. Should I assign it to someone already? you can submit it to me jsc or better to Stephan Bergmann (sb) Please Cc me (rene). By the way you can add the scripting framework jar file manually to the classpath and can check if it works. See above, adding the jars generally to UNO_JFW_CLASSPATH_URLS seems to work, although that shoudln't be necessary.. Regards, Rene -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFG5QKH+FmQsCSK63MRAnXvAJ4m8TQZVHGG0Ob0ecyK0RQGEN69ywCfSE+j gtgrA8jpHN5SSgtNe6VRtuY= =kPnq -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev] OOo_2.3.0rc2_20070905 and Scripting Framework: were there any changes there ?
Rene Engelhard wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, Juergen Schmidt wrote: How would I state OOo deployed jars in the manifest file (i.e. to point to program/classes/ScriptFramework.jar wherever the program dir resides on a filesystem? (Sorry, if this is a rooky question, but I have not stumbled over that that is exactly the problem. Because you don't know exactly if your extension is deployed per user only or for all users of this installation. Hmm. hmm ;-) The necessary entry in the jar manifest file requires a relative path to dependent jars. If I know that it's deployed system-wide (because that's what http://packages.debian.org/openoffice.orgf-report-builder does), how do I specify the classpath then? Relative to what? what i have described is the mechanism how jar files should define their dependencies. And of course it doesn't fit for all cases with extensions. Well there is maybe already a solution. But as i don't know the details exactly i doesn't want to name it here. There are some special entries in the manifest possible and Stephan can tell us the secrets of them in detail. /me has that problem with sun-report-design.oxt and jars not even built by the build process or stuff which will be used from the system anyway. The only solution I found so far is adding them to UNO_JFW_CLASSPATH_URLS because as you said, classes/ won't work. well that should work but it is not the intended solution. It would have been better if you would have informed us about this problem instead of hacking a solution together ;-) Anyway i am sure we will find a solution. Juergen yet, or my memory fades already... ;) ) you should submit an issue for that problem. Should I assign it to someone already? you can submit it to me jsc or better to Stephan Bergmann (sb) Please Cc me (rene). By the way you can add the scripting framework jar file manually to the classpath and can check if it works. See above, adding the jars generally to UNO_JFW_CLASSPATH_URLS seems to work, although that shoudln't be necessary.. Regards, Rene -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFG5QKH+FmQsCSK63MRAnXvAJ4m8TQZVHGG0Ob0ecyK0RQGEN69ywCfSE+j gtgrA8jpHN5SSgtNe6VRtuY= =kPnq -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev] OOo_2.3.0rc2_20070905 and Scripting Framework: were there any changes there ?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, Juergen Schmidt wrote: /me has that problem with sun-report-design.oxt and jars not even built by the build process or stuff which will be used from the system anyway. The only solution I found so far is adding them to UNO_JFW_CLASSPATH_URLS because as you said, classes/ won't work. well that should work but it is not the intended solution. It would have Indeed. been better if you would have informed us about this problem instead of hacking a solution together ;-) In fact, I didn't yet ;-). What I described abopve was the result of my first investigations. It not in the packages yet.. Mainly also because sac is not yet accepted into Debian anyway and just doing it for jcommon would only fix it the half-way and need an update later. (The package will live in experimental until this is fixed anyway). I would have asked when everything was ready to do it, or approach you at OOoCon next week. But that issue came up here by Rony so I jumped in ;-) Anyway i am sure we will find a solution. Hopefully. Stefan? Regards, Rene -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFG5Q2a+FmQsCSK63MRArJsAJ9jfmFb/WEN/cfHQ+7vKmiUVkw9YACeIE9x POsRpOA8HBncm7bJVlg+p/E= =1MR6 -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev] OOo_2.3.0rc2_20070905 and Scripting Framework: were there any changes there ?
Hi Jürgen, By the way you can add the scripting framework jar file manually to the classpath and can check if it works. Just tried it: does not work. Also tried using Rene Engelhards suggestion (UNO_JFW_CLASSPATH_URLS), unfortunately to no avail. Will file an issue. Thanks again for your quick answers! ---rony P.S.: Of course all OOo jars would be needed in addition that reside in the classes directory. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev] OOo_2.3.0rc2_20070905 and Scripting Framework: were there any changes there ?
Rony G. Flatscher wrote: Hi Jürgen, By the way you can add the scripting framework jar file manually to the classpath and can check if it works. Just tried it: does not work. Also tried using Rene Engelhards suggestion (UNO_JFW_CLASSPATH_URLS), unfortunately to no avail. Will file an issue. Thanks again for your quick answers! ---rony P.S.: Of course all OOo jars would be needed in addition that reside in the classes directory. well, they are needed for certain areas but not all are necessary for extensions. If they are necessary we should provide a way to explicitly reference them. As i have mentioned before we probably have this mechanism already in place and Stephan (who is sick today) knows best. Juergen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[dev] Filed as Issue # 81445 (Re: [dev] OOo_2.3.0rc2_20070905 and Scripting Framework: were there any changes there ?
Hi Jürgen, did submit the issue and set it to P1 (highest priority), as maybe other third party Java based components/extensions may be affected by this too. (Though P1 might have been to high.) Here's the URL: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=81445. Regards, ---rony - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev] Filed as Issue # 81445 (Re: [dev] OOo_2.3.0rc2_20070905 and Scripting Framework: were there any changes there ?
Rony G. Flatscher wrote: Hi Jürgen, did submit the issue and set it to P1 (highest priority), as maybe other third party Java based components/extensions may be affected by this too. (Though P1 might have been to high.) Here's the URL: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=81445. see also http://so-web.germany.sun.com/iBIS/servlet/edit.ControlPanel?tid=i80100 http://so-web.germany.sun.com/iBIS/servlet/edit.ControlPanel?tid=i51803 as references. Juergen Regards, ---rony - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev] Filed as Issue # 81445 (Re: [dev] OOo_2.3.0rc2_20070905 and Scripting Framework: were there any changes there ?
Juergen Schmidt wrote: Rony G. Flatscher wrote: Hi Jürgen, did submit the issue and set it to P1 (highest priority), as maybe other third party Java based components/extensions may be affected by this too. (Though P1 might have been to high.) Here's the URL: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=81445. see also http://so-web.germany.sun.com/iBIS/servlet/edit.ControlPanel?tid=i80100 http://so-web.germany.sun.com/iBIS/servlet/edit.ControlPanel?tid=i51803 as references. Thank you very much for these as well (at the moment the server name is not resolvable, will try it later)! ---rony P.S.: Gute Besserung for Stephan. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
