Bug 30200

Summary: junitreport doesn't work with Xalan 2.2/Java 1.4.1
Product: Ant Reporter: Robert Watkins <robert.watkins>
Component: Optional TasksAssignee: Ant Notifications List <notifications>
Severity: minor CC: rumster
Priority: P3    
Version: 1.6.2   
Target Milestone: ---   
Hardware: Other   
OS: other   
URL: http://twasink.net/blog/archives/2004/07/ant_162_junitre.html

Description Robert Watkins 2004-07-20 06:00:42 UTC
The new stylesheet used in <junitreport> doesn't work with Java 1.4.1/Xalan 
2.2; it complains about a missing 'redirect' class.

It works fine with Java 1.4.2, and with Xalan 2.6.

Upgrading Xalan 2.6 is a litte tricky; see http://xml.apache.org/xalan-
j/faq.html#faq-N100CC for details on how to do it.
Comment 1 Stephane Bailliez 2004-07-20 09:27:10 UTC
It's indeed extremely annoying but unfortunately there is not much to do as we 
had to take a decision to support Xalan as bundled in the upcoming JDK 1.5 and 
I could not find a way to support both kind of directives.

See PR 27541 for more information

You can however specify the deprecated xsl in ${ant.home}/etc/junit-frames-

I had a quick look at Xalan CVS, and looks like the new namespace was used 
starting from Xalan 2.4.1 (and JDK 1.4.2-01):

Comment 2 Robert Watkins 2004-07-20 11:57:20 UTC
This was more a suggestion to update the doco; it was rather surprising to
stumble over it. The release notes, for example, made it clear that Xalan 1 was
not supported, but doesn't say that earlier versions of Xalan 2 won't work either.

Given the two workarounds (update Xalan or use the old stylesheet) I see no
reason to try and make it work with Xalan 2.2, but I do recommend the doco be
Comment 3 Stephane Bailliez 2004-07-30 17:52:27 UTC
The reason it is not in the doc is simple.

We did not know about it as apparently everyone involved with this fix was 
running and it is extremely painful and time consuming to support 
dozen of versions of products that are not backward compatible.

I have updated the docs in CVS to give more information though.

Comment 4 Stephane Bailliez 2004-08-10 08:31:36 UTC
*** Bug 30524 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***