Bug 28239 - java.io.IOException: Cannot remove block[ 330 ]; out of range
Summary: java.io.IOException: Cannot remove block[ 330 ]; out of range
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 44898
Alias: None
Product: POI
Classification: Unclassified
Component: POIFS (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All All
: P3 normal (vote)
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: POI Developers List
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2004-04-06 19:25 UTC by Ryan Ackley
Modified: 2008-05-20 08:43 UTC (History)
1 user (show)


Attachments
Proposed fix (875 bytes, patch)
2008-04-29 17:27 UTC, Trejkaz (pen name) 		Details | Diff
View All Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Ryan Ackley 2004-04-06 19:25:36 UTC 
I get the following stacktrace on a valid OLE file (MS Project): 

java.io.IOException: Cannot remove block[ 330 ]; out of range

	at org.apache.poi.poifs.storage.BlockListImpl.remove
(BlockListImpl.java:103)

	at org.apache.poi.poifs.storage.BlockAllocationTableReader.fetchBlocks
(BlockAllocationTableReader.java:190)

	at org.apache.poi.poifs.storage.BlockListImpl.fetchBlocks
(BlockListImpl.java:128)

	at org.apache.poi.poifs.eventfilesystem.POIFSReader.processProperties
(POIFSReader.java:275)

	at org.apache.poi.poifs.eventfilesystem.POIFSReader.processProperties
(POIFSReader.java:228)

	at org.apache.poi.poifs.eventfilesystem.POIFSReader.processProperties
(POIFSReader.java:228)

	at org.apache.poi.poifs.eventfilesystem.POIFSReader.read
(POIFSReader.java:95)
Comment 1 Trejkaz (pen name) 2008-04-29 17:27:37 UTC 
Created attachment 21881 [details]
Proposed fix

It is as I thought, removing that one line makes all our files parse correctly.
Comment 2 Trejkaz (pen name) 2008-04-29 17:30:04 UTC 
My apologies, the attachment I just put up was really for Bug 44898, but the bugs are very similar and it would be interesting to see if it fixes the problem.
Comment 3 Nick Burch 2008-05-20 08:43:09 UTC 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 44898 ***