This is the mail archive of the
docbook-apps@lists.oasis-open.org
mailing list .
Re: openjade vs. jade
- From: Yann Dirson <ydirson at fr dot alcove dot com>
- To: "A.R. (Tom) Peters" <tpeters at xs4all dot nl>
- Cc: docbook-apps at lists dot oasis-open dot org
- Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 14:18:21 +0100
- Subject: Re: DOCBOOK-APPS: openjade vs. jade
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0301212144160.635-100000@tompth.localdomain.fake>
On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 09:45:16PM +0100, A.R. (Tom) Peters wrote:
> openjade:/usr/share/sgml/docbook/dtd/xml/3.1.7/docbook.cat:27:0:W: DTDDECL
> catalog entries are not supported
> openjade:/usr/share/sgml/docbook/stylesheet/dsssl/modular/catalog:28:0:W:
> DTDDECL catalog entries are not supported
>
> So openjade is not a drop-in replacement of jade? Any caveats?
> What is going on, what might be wrong with DTDDECL's?
You're probably using an old version of openjade, linked against an
old opensp. If you get openjade 1.3.2, built against opensp 1.5,
these messages should disappear, DTDDECL are now supported.
Note that jade does not support those, and just silently ignore them.
If you cannot upgrade, you can just filter those output lines. The
runjade[1] script already does this accessory job, in addition to its
main purpose which is working around return code not being always set
by (open)jade.
[1] http://savannah.gnu.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs/*checkout*/alcovebook/sgml2x/bin/runjade?rev=1.3.2.1
Note: I cannot find an HTTP request to the latest version on
the stable branch, but this one is unlikely to change in the
next months
--
Yann Dirson <Yann.Dirson@fr.alcove.com> http://www.alcove.com/
Technical support manager Responsable de l'assistance technique
Senior Free-Software Consultant Consultant senior en Logiciels Libres
Debian developer (dirson@debian.org) Développeur Debian