Kay Ramme - Sun Germany - Hamburg wrote:
Mike,
Mike Traum wrote:
Kay,
I understand what you're saying about the Bootsrap, but right now,
the Loader is completely dependant on OOo.
As far as the error reporting to the user, this could be done. But,
maybe I wasn't clear because I made some points in previous emails.
If a user has an installation of OOo 1.1.x and 1.9.x on their
machine. and my application requires 1.9.x, I really think the
Bootstrap (or Loader to be more specific) needs to do it's best to
find the 1.9.x installation. As detailed in other messsages, under
this situation, a client under Windows will always get the 1.1.x
instance and a unix/linux client, I believe, will simply get
whichever one was installed most recently. Telling a user that 1.9.x
is required when they actually have it installed on their machine
will make no sense to them, and I think exposes a flaw in the Loader.
I tend to agree, that in the current situation it probably is most
reasonable to find the installation with the highest version number, as
per definition it is compatible to older ones anyway.
Such a change can be done without API changes, IMHO open points are
- does Java applications need to be rejarred to benefit from the change?
- it is enough to adapt this change in the latest OOo builds or do we
need to patch the 1.1 branch also?
Thomas, may be you can shed some light on this? Obviously the best
solution would just be some modifications for the current build.
Kay
There's no unique way to define the latest installation by using the
version number. The problem is, that we have various products, e.g.
OpenOffice.org, StarOffice and many others. Nobody knows now,
if OpenOffice.org 5.0 will be newer than StarOffice 12.
Therefore we decided, that the user or administrator makes the decision,
which office is used by defining the default installation.
In addition, the current implementation of the loader does only find
the default installation. Therefore it's not possible to choose an
installation from a list of all installations. There was some
prototype which tried to find all installations on a system, but
first of all this prototype did not find all installations and
second this prototype had very poor performance (e.g. searching whole
disks for a office installation takes time).
Thomas
Thanks,
mike
--- Kay Ramme - Sun Germany - Hamburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Mike,
as outlined in my other mail, there are various combination
possibilities of OOo installations and different client
requirements(, which even hold true for documents e.g. with embedded
code).
The automatic bootstrapping is designed in a way, that it may be
usable for any kind of future UNO application, by slightly changing
the implementation. Eventually having a central repository, where _all_
services shall be registered, certainly including different OOo
installations. For UNO, and OOo is just a collection of UNO
components, the right level for defining requirements is the
"SERVICE". Unfortunately such an automatic requirement checking is not
available yet.
To help with your problem of being dependent against a particular
OOo version, wouldn't the problem be solved by just reporting that a
particular service is not available and by giving some hints for
diagnostic purposes? E.g. something like "Service <BLA> could not
be instantiated, this service is not available in OOo versions earlier
than 1.9.x".
Kay
Mike Traum wrote:
Putting it in the documentation really doesn't solve the problem,
though.
I really can't understand why this would not be a good idea. For
example, I have written a client app using the OOo 1.9.x sdk,
which
uses functionality that is not backward compatible. Why would I
want
the Loader to find an instance of OOo 1.1.x, which is guaranteed
to
fail with my app?
mike
--- Christian Junker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I don't think this would be a good idea, addressing this issue in
the introductory text of the new SDK is
the
better approach since it's more general. My proposal is to
include
a
note that examples might not work with the new SDK for OO 1.1.x
or
older.
On Apr 11, 2005 6:22 PM, Mike Traum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I see what you're saying about the independence of UNO and
OpenOffice.
But, I guess when I was talking about the searching algorithm. I
was
really referring to the algorithm being done in Loader. Loader
is
completely dependenant on OpenOffice, so I think that it should
be
searching for a compatible version of OpenOffice, and then fall
back
if it doesn't find one.
mike
--- Jürgen Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi
Mike Traum wrote:
If SDK 1.9m77 is truely incompatible with OOo 1.1.x, what's
the
purpose of the whole search algorithm in the bootstrap?
Shouldn't
it,
then, just be searching for installations it's compatible
with?
the SDK maybe use features that are only available in the
current
or
newer office versions. So the only statement from our side is
that
the
SDK will work with the corresponding office version or newer
ones.
But
we don't guarantee that it works with older offices. But that
mean
not
that it won't work ;-)
And again the bootstrap mechanism was not designed for the pure
office
usage. It was design for the general UNO usage and from that
point
of
view it should be of no interest which UNO environment you get.
From my
point of view we had better designed a office bootstrap
mechanism
but so
what.
I agree that it can be of interest which specific service
implementation
is available in the env or which version you can use. And of
course
for
this kind of information we have definitely no good answer yet.
From an
office point of view it can be aligned with the office version
but
from
a general UNO component view we have to find a better solution
(maybe
some kind of component dependencies). But i have no real idea
at
the moment.
Juergen
mike
--- Christian Junker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The SDK 1.9m77 is not intended to be used for OO 1.1.4.
That said I don't know if it is incompatible to OO 1.1.x, but
since
bootstrapping has changed a lot over the last months it is
not
surprising to me that problems occur in your case.
On Apr 7, 2005 4:27 PM, Mike Traum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm using the 1.9.m77 sdk to write a java client. I've been
having
other problems, but along the way, I was told that OOo 1.1.4
supports
the Bootstrap, but there is currently a bug when having a
space
in
the path name of the installation.
So, I removed the installation, installed without the space,
and
I
still get the same stack trace.
thanks,
mike
Here's the stack trace:
-------------------------------------------
Exception in thread "main"
java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException
at
sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native
Method)
at
sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(Unknown
Source)
at
sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(Unknown
Source)
at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Unknown Source)
at
com.sun.star.lib.loader.Loader.main(Loader.java:169)
Caused by: java.lang.UnsatisfiedLinkError: createJNI
at
com.sun.star.lib.connections.pipe.PipeConnection.createJNI(Native
Method)
at
com.sun.star.lib.connections.pipe.PipeConnection.<init>(PipeConnection.java:156)
at
com.sun.star.lib.connections.pipe.pipeConnector.connect(pipeConnector.java:171)
at
com.sun.star.comp.connections.Connector.connect(Connector.java:172)
at
com.sun.star.comp.urlresolver.UrlResolver$_UrlResolver.resolve(UrlResolver.java:159)
at
com.sun.star.comp.helper.Bootstrap.bootstrap(Bootstrap.java:292)
... [ my classes ] ...
-------------------------------------------
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates.
http://personals.yahoo.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Best Regards
Christian Junker
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Make Yahoo! your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Best Regards
Christian Junker
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small
Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small
Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
