[fedora-java] Strange new build failures

[Orion Poplawski]

On 04/15/2015 12:01 PM, Omair Majid wrote:
> Hi,
>
> * Roland Grunberg <rgrunber at redhat.com> [2015-04-15 13:33]:
>>> jexl is now failing in rawhide with an odd failure:
>>>
>>> [ERROR] Failed to execute goal
>>> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-javadoc-plugin:2.10.3:aggregate
>>> (default-cli) on project commons-jexl: An error has occurred in JavaDocs
>>> report generation:
>>> [ERROR] Exit code: 1 -
>>> /builddir/build/BUILD/commons-jexl-2.1.1-src/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/jexl2/ExpressionImpl.java:35:
>>> error: bad HTML entity
>>> [ERROR] * Original expression stripped from leading & trailing spaces.
>>> [ERROR] ^
>>> [ERROR]
>>> /builddir/build/BUILD/commons-jexl-2.1.1-src/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/jexl2/Interpreter.java:888:
>>> warning: no @param for node
>>> [ERROR] public Object visit(ASTFloatLiteral node, Object data) {
>>> [ERROR] ^
>>> [ERROR]
>>> /builddir/build/BUILD/commons-jexl-2.1.1-src/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/jexl2/Interpreter.java:888:
>>> warning: no @param for data
>>>
>>> Something odd change in java land?
>
> Yes. We removed a patch in Rawhide that was diverging from upstream. Now
> Fedora's OpenJDK 8 is more like upstream OpenJDK 8 and (proprietary)
> Oracle Java 8.
>
>> My guess is that the '- removed patch6: disable-doclint-by-default.patch'
>> had something to do with it, but I haven't really checked any further.
>>
>> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=628509
>
> Yup. This patch was *disabling* doclint. Now it is enabled by default.
> This makes javadoc much more strict about what is validates as valid
> javadoc. If your javadoc is invalid for some reason (bad html, unescaped
> entities, adding comments after @return), then javadoc will now fail.
>
> There's more information about this, including more details about how to
> turn it off, here:
> http://blog.joda.org/2014/02/turning-off-doclint-in-jdk-8-javadoc.html
>
> TLDR: You can disable doclint by passing the `-Xdoclint:none` option to
> javadoc.
>
> Another option is to fix the upstream package to have valid javadocs and
> contribute the fixes back upstream. They will hit the same issues when
> they try building using the (proprietary) Oracle Java 8. This will fix
> it for others too.
>
>> I've run into the same issues. I remember a while ago hearing that
>> the javadoc parser would be getting much stricter but never thought
>> it'd be this strict.
>
> Yeah, it's a bit too strict, IMHO. But upstream is unconvinced at this
> point about it. Fortunately, fixing the javadoc is quite simple,
> generally. If anyone needs help, I will be happy to do what I can to fix
> packages.
>
> Thanks,
> Omair

Thanks for the info.  I've managed to patch jexl.

-- 
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager                     303-415-9701 x222
NWRA/CoRA Division                    FAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane                  orion at cora.nwra.com
Boulder, CO 80301              http://www.cora.nwra.com