Re: [med-svn] r3229 - trunk/packages/imagej/trunk/debian

[Andreas Tille <tillea@rki.de>]

Hi Paolo,

I tried to upgrade the imagej package to the latest upstream version while
trying to fix at least one bug which seems to be a low hanging fruit (#505315):

On Mon, 30 Mar 2009, tille@alioth.debian.org wrote:

> Author: tille
> Date: 2009-03-30 09:03:19 +0000 (Mon, 30 Mar 2009)
> New Revision: 3229
>
> Modified:
>   trunk/packages/imagej/trunk/debian/changelog
>   trunk/packages/imagej/trunk/debian/control
>   trunk/packages/imagej/trunk/debian/imagej.sh
> Log:
> Use dirname/readlink /usr/bin/java instead upf update-alternatives to obtain JVM
> New upstream version; unfortunately there seems to be a regression in Upstream code with JPEGEncoder so this package does not build
> ...


...
    [javac]                                     param.setDensityUnit(JPEGEncodeParam.DENSITY_UNIT_DOTS_INCH);
    [javac]                                                          ^
    [javac] /tmp/buildd/imagej-1.42l/ij/plugin/JpegWriter.java:54: cannot find symbol
    [javac] symbol  : variable DENSITY_UNIT_DOTS_INCH
    [javac] location: class com.sun.image.codec.jpeg.JPEGEncodeParam
    [javac]                                     param.setDensityUnit(JPEGEncodeParam.DENSITY_UNIT_DOTS_INCH);
    [javac]                                                                         ^
    [javac] /tmp/buildd/imagej-1.42l/ij/plugin/filter/AVI_Writer.java:372: warning: com.sun.image.codec.jpeg.JPEGCodec is Sun proprietary API and may be removed in a future release
    [javac]             jpegEncoder = JPEGCodec.createJPEGEncoder(raOutputStream);
    [javac]                           ^
    [javac] Note: Some input files use or override a deprecated API.
    [javac] Note: Recompile with -Xlint:deprecation for details.
    [javac] 5 errors
    [javac] 8 warnings


I vaguely remember that there were some issues with ImageJ upstream handling of
JPEG and I wonder whether this is just a regression.  Could you please comment
on this?.  Would you be able to verify the other bug reported against ImageJ
concerning the Plugin behaviour?

Kind regards

       Andreas.

--
http://fam-tille.de