RE: Testing for main development stream.

2003-12-07 Thread Andreas L. Delmelle 
> -Original Message-
> From: John Austin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> So, the desired behaviour is open a report in Bugzilla ?
>
> Will do that for the three or four I found.

Yuppa! (Even more desired would be to immediately add a patch that solves
it, of course :) )

Cheers,

Andreas

Re: Testing for main development stream.

2003-12-07 Thread John Austin 
On Sun, 2003-12-07 at 06:25, J.Pietschmann wrote:
> John Austin wrote:
> > It seems that the relative file reference ../graphics/page.gif is
> > computed by the program relative to the 'current directory' not
> > relative to the file: 'test/xml/bugtests/image.fo'.
> > 
> > I'm sure the spec has an opinion on this.
> 
> Interestingly, the XSLFO spec doesn't have an opinion on this. However,
> by using the term "URL" they probably imply the usual resolving procedure
> for URLs apply, meaning any relative URL is resolved against the base URL
> of the containing document or base document (in case the FO is generated
> by XSLT).
> This means there is a problem to correct.
> 
> J.Pietschmann

So, the desired behaviour is open a report in Bugzilla ?

Will do that for the three or four I found.
-- 
John Austin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: Testing for main development stream.

2003-12-07 Thread J.Pietschmann 
John Austin wrote:
It seems that the relative file reference ../graphics/page.gif is
computed by the program relative to the 'current directory' not
relative to the file: 'test/xml/bugtests/image.fo'.
I'm sure the spec has an opinion on this.
Interestingly, the XSLFO spec doesn't have an opinion on this. However,
by using the term "URL" they probably imply the usual resolving procedure
for URLs apply, meaning any relative URL is resolved against the base URL
of the containing document or base document (in case the FO is generated
by XSLT).
This means there is a problem to correct.
J.Pietschmann

Testing for main development stream.

2003-12-06 Thread John Austin 
I ran a few tests of a recent copy of the 1.0dev
stream and found some errors. 

What are your preferences for problem reports at this time ?

Should I enter issues into BugZilla as I find them ?

Should I take a look at the code and notify the committer
who last worked on anything I find ?

So far:

1) ./build.sh test <-- testing fails quickly
2) ./build.sh junit <-- are there any tests ? 
3) from root directory (the one containing build.xml) I ran:

find test -name "*.fo" -print -exec ./test.sh {} \;

where test.sh contains:

#!/bin/sh

java -Xms100m -Xmx200m -cp
.:build/fop.jar:lib/avalon-framework-4.1.4.jar:lib/batik.jar:lib/commons-io-dev-20030703.jar
 org.apache.fop.apps.Fop -fo ${1} -pdf /tmp/$$.pdf

I get quite a few errors.

One example problem (or non-problem):

test/xml/bugtests/image.fo
[INFO] 1.0dev
[ERROR] Error while opening stream for (file:../graphics/page.gif):
.../graphics/page.gif (No such file or directory)
java.io.FileNotFoundException: .../graphics/page.gif (No such file or
directory)
at java.io.FileInputStream.open(Native Method)


It seems that the relative file reference ../graphics/page.gif is
computed by the program relative to the 'current directory' not
relative to the file: 'test/xml/bugtests/image.fo'.

I'm sure the spec has an opinion on this. There are other errors.
(other opinions too no doubt)

test/xml/bugtests/text-transform.fo
[INFO] 1.0dev
Invalid byte 1 of 1-byte UTF-8 sequence.
Turn on debugging for more information






-- 
John Austin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>