Bug 462580

Summary:	Review Request: wstx - Woodstox Stax Implementation
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	John Guthrie <mathguthrie>
Component:	Package Review	Assignee:	Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody>
Status:	CLOSED NOTABUG	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	rawhide	CC:	fedora-package-review, mefoster, notting, thomasj
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2009-10-29 11:09:45 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	201449

Description John Guthrie 2008-09-17 10:25:07 UTC

Spec URL: http://www.guthrie.info/RPMS/f9/wstx.spec
SRPM URL: http://www.guthrie.info/RPMS/f9/wstx-3.1.1-3.1.fc9.src.rpm
Description: Woodstox is a high-performance validating namespace-aware
StAX-compliant (JSR-173) Open Source XML-processor written
in Java.
XML processor means that it handles both input (== parsing)
and output (== writing, serialization)), as well as
supporting tasks such as validation.

Comment 1 Mary Ellen Foster 2008-11-25 13:03:17 UTC

This package didn't build in mock for me (fedora-9-i386); amid a lot of warnings was the following error:

    [javac] 98. ERROR in /builddir/build/BUILD/wstx/src/java/com/ctc/wstx/evt/WAttribute.java (at line 97)
    [javac] 	public String getDTDType() {
    [javac] 	       ^^^^^^
    [javac] The return type is incompatible with Attribute.getDTDType()
 

If I build (locally) with OpenJDK instead of GCJ, it builds fine, so this seems to be an incompatibility in the signature of that method. Not sure what the solution is.

Comment 2 Mary Ellen Foster 2008-11-25 13:12:05 UTC

While I'm at it, here are some rpmlint warnings on the OpenJDK-built packages:

wstx.i386: W: no-documentation
(probably not an issue, but should some of the files from the "manual" subpackage maybe be included as documentation in the main package?)

wstx.i386: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/maven/fragments/wstx
(should it be marked %config(noreplace) ?)

wstx.i386: E: explicit-lib-dependency msv-xsdlib
(false positive because of the package name matching "*lib*")

wstx.i386: W: non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Java
(should be "Development/Libraries"?)

wstx-j2me.i386: W: no-documentation
(no big issue)

wstx-j2me.i386: W: non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Java
(==> "Development/Libraries" ?)

wstx-javadoc.i386: W: non-standard-group Development/Documentation
(==> "Documentation" ?)

wstx-manual.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/wstx-3.1.1/CREDITS
(run iconv on it during the build:
inside %prep:
    iconv -f CREDITS > tmp.utf8
    mv tmp.utf8 CREDITS
)

wstx-manual.i386: W: non-standard-group Development/Documentation
(==> "Documentation" ?)

Comment 3 Jason Tibbitts 2009-03-25 02:44:07 UTC

It's been a long time since the previous comment with no response; I'll close this soon if nothing happens.

Comment 4 John Guthrie 2009-04-01 13:47:52 UTC

I apologize for the non-response.  I've been looking on a search results page for someone to actually assign this review request to themselves.  (It would be nice if there was some way to get last time modified into search results on bugzilla.)  Anyway, I am re-opening this bug and I will have a response to the issues brought up soon.

Comment 5 Thomas Janssen 2009-10-04 09:38:25 UTC

What exactly means soon in this case? The last response is already 5+ months ago.
Are you still with us or is it now dead?

-- 
Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers

Comment 6 Thomas Janssen 2009-10-29 11:09:45 UTC

Well, nothing happens. No response. I close this now.

-- 
Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers