Note: This is a beta release of Red Hat Bugzilla 5.0. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Also email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback here.
Bug 462580 - Review Request: wstx - Woodstox Stax Implementation
Summary: Review Request: wstx - Woodstox Stax Implementation
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
Depends On:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2008-09-17 10:25 UTC by John Guthrie
Modified: 2009-10-29 11:09 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2009-10-29 11:09:45 UTC

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description John Guthrie 2008-09-17 10:25:07 UTC
Spec URL:
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/ (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

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

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.