Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > If you are using a home-grown script that is fine. However, I > suspect that > > you are actually using fop.bat or fop.sh at some point. > > in fact, i'm using neither fop.sh nor fop.bat. given the number of > java tools i'm using (xerces, xalan, saxon, etc.), i have a single > directory where i keep all those jar files, and my CLASSPATH contains > all of the relevant jar files. so far, it's worked fine, until i > got to FOP.
OK, so go back to my first statement: "If you are using a home-grown script that is fine." So, if you're smart enough to write your own script, then we can at least hope that you are smart enough to debug one. Use whatever method you like. IMO, the easiest way to do that in this situation is to first do it the way that works for thousands of other people, then systematically figure out what is different between that approach and the approach you are trying to use. It frankly seems abusive to say "I understand the instructions, but refuse to follow them, and insist that someone help me design an approach that suits me better." There are people who can do that for a fee (FOP developers among them), but I don't feel any obligation to customize your installation for you for free. > > If so, then a cursory examination of those scripts will show that FOP > > doesn't use your classpath at all, but builds its own. This is important > > for some of the dependencies (like Batik) that require a very specific > > version number to work correctly with FOP. So, you can hack fop.sh if > > you wish, but if you do, then make sure you hack build.xml as well, > > because otherwise if you try to build FOP from source down the road, you > > will do so without JIMI or JAI support. IMO, it is really much better to > > simply follow the instructions. > > while i can appreciate the version dependency issue, this strikes me as > a *really* cumbersome and awkward approach. i took at look at fop.sh, > and from what i can see after first pass, there should be no difference > between installing JIMI/JAI under the fop directory, or copying their > respective jar files wherever i want, as long as the CLASSPATH is set > correctly. Well, it may be cumbersome and awkward, but usually we ignore such comments unless they are accompanied by a suggestion for improvement. I see none. Nevertheless, I agree in principle with your conclusion that it should run if you are properly setting your CLASSPATH to point to it. > forcing either JAI or JIMI to be installed under the fop directory > for proper operation is, IMHO, a bad thing. but perhaps i've just > missed some final step that will make it work. i'll give it another > shot. Well, nobody is forcing you to do that. We don't even force you to install the FOP stuff in the FOP directory. You can extract class files & spread them out all over tarnation if you wish. We have no way of preventing it and no desire to do so. Victor Mote --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
