Re: [Tei-council] shooting the messenger : make still broken

1 Jul 2019

      Won't work on Windows or OS X though. Macs have a /usr/share/java, but
there's nothing useful in it.

On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 7:39 AM Peter Stadler 
wrote:
...
In general, I’d say that this is a standard component which should be
provided by the respective base system, not by our repository.
For the Docker image, we should provide a way to make this available to
ant. A rather simple approach would be to symlink /usr/share/java  to
~/.ant/lib. (I just tried and `ant -diagnostics` shows it works)
Best
Peter
...
Am 01.07.2019 um 13:03 schrieb Hugh Cayless :
Can we depend on the resolver being in /usr/share/java on every system
though? I'd have thought not.
I suspect the Jenkins Docker build does a not-altogether-standard
install of OpenJDK 8, meaning not everything is where ant might expect to
find it.
On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 6:07 AM Peter Stadler <
pstadler@mail.uni-paderborn.de> wrote:
tools.jar shouldn’t be an issue because although being in a different
place it’s in the java classpath.
The resolver.jar indeed is not. It’s installed as xml-resolver-1.2.jar
under /usr/share/java/ which is not in the java classpath.
Rather than adding this jar to our Utilities folder (which is already
cluttered with external libraries) I’d prefer to fix the Docker image by
adding  /usr/share/java/ to the java classpath globally.
Best
Peter
...
Am 30.06.2019 um 17:50 schrieb Hugh Cayless :
Just trying out the Jenkins Docker, and indeed, tools.jar is not in
/usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/lib/tools.jar, but it *is* in
/usr/local/openjdk-8/lib/, so something funky is going on with that...
On Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 11:19 AM Hugh Cayless 
wrote:
The Jenkins Docker build should have a proper JDK installed
automatically, but maybe it's not where ant thinks it should be?
On Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 11:07 AM Lou Burnard <
lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
Installing open-jdk-8-jdk got rid of those messages for me (on ancient
version of ubuntu)
...
I see the following message in the logs: "Unable to locate tools.jar.
Expected to find it in
/usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/lib/tools.jar" I
think that means the JDK isn't installed, or isn't completely
installed?
On Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 10:45 AM Hugh Cayless

 wrote:
...
It's still failing on Jenkins though...not sure why. It's still
giving the
"Warning: XML resolver not found; external catalogs will be ignored"
message, which I no longer get locally, so I'm guessing it's not
seeing, or
is failing to deal with, the resolver-1.2.0.jar library.
On Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 10:25 AM Lou Burnard

wrote:
...
Thanks Hugh. With those changes, it works fine for me too. Someone
should
remember to tell Luis not to bother, all the same!
On 30/06/2019 14:45, Hugh Cayless wrote:
I've had a go at fixing this by adding an XML catalog for the RNGs
in
Exemplars, and (incidentally) fixing that dratted warning about the
missing
resolver by adding one. It builds successfully for me locally.
We'll see if
it works for Jenkins...
Hugh
On Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 7:22 AM Lou Burnard

wrote:
The real question is: why are we including this file via an HTTP
copy from
the TEI website, when it's already present in the Exemplums
...
...
...
gnomic comment in the ODD source suggests this is something to do
with
oXGarage:
line 70:
http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0<
http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0> http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0 xmlns:rng="
http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0" <http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0
http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0 <
http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0> url="
https://www.tei-c.org/release/xml/tei/custom/schema/relaxng/svg11.rng" <
https://www.tei-c.org/release/xml/tei/custom/schema/relaxng/svg11.rng><
https://www.tei-c.org/release/xml/tei/custom/schema/relaxng/svg11.rng> <
https://www.tei-c.org/release/xml/tei/custom/schema/relaxng/svg11.rng>
>
<!-- this needs to be an absolute URI to keep oxGarage happy -->
(This is for the inclusion of SVG rng, but the same applies,
...
...
...
to the inclusion of mathml.rng)
But
(a) is this still really true? is the new oxGarage less demanding?
Peter?
(b) even if it is true, wouldn't it be better to point to a website
run by
the people who run SVG and Mathml (respectively) assuming there is
such a
thing?
The copy in the Exemplum directory is exactly the same as the one I
just
downloaded from the TEI website. Since the former has been
languishing
there for THIRTEEN YEARS,  it's not the most dynamic of data in any
case...
It seems to me it would be better to try to work within the
constraints of
having a professionally maintained secure website than bend the
rules. I
assume Luis set this limit for a purpose, and I'd rather trust his
judgment
if possible!
On 30/06/2019 05:31, Martin Holmes wrote:
I think I was wrong about this: the server error is 429, which is
"too
many requests". I think the tei server may be set up to reject
repeated
requests for the same files, which is something the build process
does as a
matter of course. I've written to Luis to ask if there's a limit,
and if
so, whether it can be lifted.
[xslt]
/var/lib/jenkins/jobs/Stylesheets-dev/lastSuccessful/archive/dist/xml/tei/stylesheet/odds/teiodds.xsl:1236:20:
...
Fatal Error! I/O error reported by XML parser processinghttps://
www.tei-c.org/release/xml/tei/custom/schema/relaxng/svg11.rng
:
Server returned HTTP response code: 429 for URL:
https://www.tei-c.org/release/xml/tei/custom/schema/relaxng/svg11.rng
...
Cause: java.io.IOException: Server returned HTTP response code: 429
for
...
URL:
https://www.tei-c.org/release/xml/tei/custom/schema/relaxng/svg11.rng
...
Cheers,
Martin
On 2019-06-29 3:16 p.m., Martin Holmes wrote:
I think this is caused by the fact that the
tei-c.org
 server is not
serving some files correctly. If you wget that URL, you'll see that
you get
...
a 301 redirect to
google.com
. I've reported this to Luis, but if I
understand his response correctly, it's some sort of security
measure he
put in place. I've asked him if he can change the setup so that
files like
rng are served appropriately as text/xml, and he agreed to look at
it.
Cheers,
Martin
On 2019-06-29 1:43 p.m., Lou Burnard wrote:
Well, the build is now a lot healthier. The new validation method
which
checks examples against the schema being documented, rather than
TEI All as
before threw up a number of bugs in the source of the simplePrint
odd. So
not all change is bad!
The Make still fails though: now with a message the meaning of which
defeats me: Anyone got any idea what's going on here?
BUILD FAILED
/home/lou/Public/TEI/P5/Test/antruntest.xml:147: Fatal error during
transformation using
/usr/share/xml/tei/stylesheet/profiles/tei/relaxng/to.xsl: I/O error
reported by XML parser processinghttps://
www.tei-c.org/release/xml/tei/Exemplars/mathml2-qname-1.mod.rng
:
Server returned HTTP response code: 429 for URL:
https://www.tei-c.org/release/xml/tei/Exemplars/mathml2-qname-1.mod.rng
...
;
SystemID:
file:/usr/share/xml/tei/stylesheet/odds/teiodds.xsl
; Line#:
1292; Column#: 21
Total time: 9 seconds
Makefile:54: recipe for target 'tei_allPlus.special' failed
make: *** [tei_allPlus.special] Error 1
I can live happily without tei_allPlus.special tbh.
On 29/06/2019 21:32, Martin Holmes wrote:
Hi Lou,
Our main objective was to try to get the build working ahead of the
release, not to say that what was done in the simplePrint ODD was
wrong. I
think you're right that there's something broken in the Stylesheets
...
...
...
wasn't broken before, but all our attempts to figure that out have
failed
so far. You're very welcome to help with that, and I really wish
you would,
rather than shouting at people.
Cheers,
Martin
On 2019-06-29 8:50 a.m., Lou Burnard wrote:
Thinking about this debacle again, it seems to me that the approach
taken
in issue #370 (oh tei_simpleprint.odd has stopped working: so there
must be
something wrong with it) is really not defensible.
1. The unmodified tei_simplePrint odd is structured in exactly the
same
way as countless other ODDs, not excluding the TEI Guidelines. It
has free
floating globs of specification elements, which are invoked from a
single
schemaSpec by means of specGrpRefs.
2. The only thing which is slightly different about it is that some
objects are declared more than once in multiple specGrps, with
@mode=change. This is because the specGrps are organised
...
...
...
example one contains changes needed to introduce processing models,
another
contains changes needed to introduce schematron rules). This kind of
logical organisation is perfectly reasonable as far as I am aware,
indeed
why else bother to have specGrps.
3. The only objection I can see to it is that an ODD processor has
to
decide how to combine two or more @mode=change specs. It's not just
a
matter of applying one set of changes: there may be a bunch of
...
...
...
is kind of the way unification grammars work in NLP: you build up
...
...
...
complete spec one bit at a time. Yes, occasionally you may find
contradictions -- one spec adds an attribute x (say) which another
one
deletes, or gives a different datatype to.  But this is not the
only place
where ODD processing is underspecified and rules of thumb are not
hard to
imagine (e.g. delete always wins; in the absence of delete, most
recent
modification always wins; etc.).
4. Moreover, and this is where I am really a bit annoyed, THIS USED
TO
WORK! So some infrastructural change has made it impossible to run
...
...
...
makefile and impossible to use the simpleprint odd as originally
designed.
And instead of trying to find what change has caused this, we are
shooting
the messenger. This my friends is called zealotry. In the immortal
words of
Michael SpMcQ in another recent context, "please don't".
_______________________________________________
Tei-council mailing
listTei-council@lists.tei-c.orghttp://
...
...
...
_______________________________________________
Tei-council mailing
listTei-council@lists.tei-c.orghttp://
...
...
...
_______________________________________________
Tei-council mailing
listTei-council@lists.tei-c.orghttp://
...
...
...
_______________________________________________
Tei-council mailing
listTei-council@lists.tei-c.orghttp://
On 30/06/2019 15:53, Hugh Cayless wrote:
directory? A
presumably,
that
thematically (for
them. This
the
the
lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
...
...
...
_______________________________________________
Tei-council mailing list
Tei-council@lists.tei-c.org
http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
_______________________________________________
Tei-council mailing list
Tei-council@lists.tei-c.org
http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council

Tei-council mailing list
Tei-council@lists.tei-c.org
http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
_______________________________________________
Tei-council mailing list
Tei-council@lists.tei-c.org
http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council