[Bug 1276653] New: fop fails to include some images
by Red Hat Bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1276653
Bug ID: 1276653
Summary: fop fails to include some images
Product: Fedora
Version: 23
Component: fop
Severity: high
Assignee: r.landmann(a)redhat.com
Reporter: wboessen(a)redhat.com
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: c.david86(a)gmail.com,
java-sig-commits(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
mizdebsk(a)redhat.com, msimacek(a)redhat.com,
msrb(a)redhat.com, rhbugs(a)n-dimensional.de,
r.landmann(a)redhat.com
Created attachment 1087917
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1087917&action=edit
Complete output from fop on a failed run.
Description of problem:
When building a PDF from a .fo file on F23, some, but not all,
external-graphic elements with a relative path to a file will generate a
"SEVERE: File not found" image.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): fop-2.0-2
How reproducible:
Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Have a directory tree like this:
test.fo
Common_Content/images/note.svg
2. include a tag like this in test.fo
<fo:external-graphic width="auto" height="auto" content-width="24pt"
src="url(Common_Content/images/note.svg)"/>
3. run fop
Actual results:
Lots of tracebacks about missing images
Expected results:
PDF renders with images, like fop-1.1 did.
Additional info:
The errors for missing images can be interesting, as the path they refer to has
the leading part doubled. The actual PDF does have empty gaps of the correct
size for the missing image.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=HNt46vlCn3&a=cc_unsubscribe
6 years, 8 months
[Bug 1256390] New: Complaint about jpackage-utils is out of date
by Red Hat Bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256390
Bug ID: 1256390
Summary: Complaint about jpackage-utils is out of date
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: fedora-review-plugin-java
Assignee: msimacek(a)redhat.com
Reporter: jonathan.underwood(a)gmail.com
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: java-sig-commits(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
mizdebsk(a)redhat.com, msimacek(a)redhat.com,
msrb(a)redhat.com
Description of problem:
Currently fedora-review will complain thusly:
- Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
if a BR/R on jpackage-utils is missing. However, jpackage-utils is now provided
by the (renamed) package javapackages-tools, and so:
1) fedora-review should be looking for a BR/R on javapackages-tools, not
jpackage-utils
2) fedora-review could also complain if a BR/R for jpackage-utils is found, and
recommend it is replaced with javapackages-tools
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
fedora-review.noarch 0.6.0-1.fc22
fedora-review-plugin-java.noarch 4.6.1-1.fc22
fedora-review-tests.noarch 0.6.0-1.fc22
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=zhZkEuTsDs&a=cc_unsubscribe
_______________________________________________
java-sig-commits mailing list
java-sig-commits(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/postorius/java-sig-commits@lists.fedorapro...
6 years, 8 months