Description of problem: When doing test builds for a potential new Fedora package, using a 1.5 minimum java resulted in javadoc errors that caused that step to fail. The error messages were: [javadoc] /builddir/build/BUILD/colossus-20090701-4427/core/src/main/java/net/sf/colossus/gui/PickLord.java:46: Syntax error (22) [javadoc] for (final CreatureType creatureType : choices) [javadoc] ^ [javadoc] Couldn't repair and continue parse at character 1122 of input and [javadoc] /builddir/build/BUILD/colossus-20090701-4427/core/src/main/java/net/sf/colossus/gui/PickRecruit.java:90: Syntax error (22) [javadoc] for (final CreatureType recruit : recruits) [javadoc] ^ [javadoc] Couldn't repair and continue parse at character 2869 of input There are other enhanced for loops in the code, but those are the only two that use the "final" keyword. gjc doesn't complain about this syntax, so it looks like a probable javadoc bug. I have two scratch builds using 1.5 and 1.6 that you can look at the build logs for or pull the srpm to retest. The 1.6 build is: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1460796 The 1.5 build is: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1460761 Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): I tested this in both f11 and f12 koji. How reproducible: 100% Steps to Reproduce: 1. Rerun the scratch builds using the generated srpms. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info:
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 12 development cycle. Changing version to '12'. More information and reason for this action is here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
I don't know the status of gjdoc upstream and whether or not this kind of enhancement is likely to get done. Andrew/Deepak, are you aware of any work there?
Thanks for CCing me on this bug, Andrew. gjdoc is part of GNU Classpath (from 0.98) and has its own parser. Only limited support was added for 1.5 constructs, so I'm not too surprised it trips over an enhanced for-loop. I can take a look at fixing this if you can provide the following info: 1. What version of gcj is being used to build the package? 2. Does gcj on Fedora use the gjdoc from gcj 4.4+, a separate gjdoc or is it still sinjdoc? I need to make sure I work on this in the right place :-)
(In reply to comment #3) > Thanks for CCing me on this bug, Andrew. gjdoc is part of GNU Classpath (from <snip> F12 does not have gjdoc. We only ship sinjdoc now, so the error is there. The sinjdoc version we use is 0.5. I haven't looked at sinjdoc doc in the past.. Andrew (Hughes), have you?
No I haven't; I wasn't even aware that Fedora shipped that instead of gjdoc until recently. From what I recall of that discussion, it's some big hex dump patch to it to add java 1.5 support. I think the best solution may be to open a bug to start using the gjdoc in gcj and relate this to it. Using sinjdoc doesn't seem overly maintainable, but I'm open to suggestions.
Andrew/Deepak: Please assign this to yourself as I won't be able to handle it for at least the next few months.
I'm sure this is still valid so bumping to rawhide.
Adding Jakub to cc: Jakub, can you please re-enable gjdoc in the gcc rpm? No provides need to be added since that will be done via the compat rpm and I will do it once gcc provides gjdoc.
Just stumbled across this again in my bookmarks. Was there ever any progress on this? Is Fedora gcj now using gjdoc?
I had changed colossus to use java 1.6 as a minimum so I don't see this error when building. I also stopped doing native code builds since that was no longer recommended. I tried doing a test build without the minimum java level set, but that didn't seem to use 1.5 for java doc, so it didn't test the problem.
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 19 development cycle. Changing version to '19'. (As we did not run this process for some time, it could affect also pre-Fedora 19 development cycle bugs. We are very sorry. It will help us with cleanup during Fedora 19 End Of Life. Thank you.) More information and reason for this action is here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping/Fedora19
This message is a notice that Fedora 19 is now at end of life. Fedora has stopped maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 19. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. Approximately 4 (four) weeks from now this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '19'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version. Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not able to fix it before Fedora 19 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora, you are encouraged change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete.
Fedora 19 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2015-01-06. Fedora 19 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this bug. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.